[ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. APPEAL (L) NO. 702 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO. 2299 OF 1985 M/s. Belt India Corporation ...Appellants. Vs. M/s. Libra Flex ...Respondents. Mrs. V.V.Thorat for the appellants. Ms. Suman Jain for the respondents. CORAM CORAM CORAM : S.B.Mhase and A.A.Sayed, JJ. : S.B.Mhase and A.A.Sayed, JJ. : S.B.Mhase and A.A.Sayed, JJ. DATE DATE DATE : April 13, 2009. : April 13, 2009. : April 13, 2009. P.C. 1. This appeal is listed for admission. The ex parte decree has been passed on 12th September, 2005 by Single Judge of this Court in Suit No. 2299 of 1985. It is very interesting to note that the Appellant-defendants were served in the Suit. Inspite of service the written statement was not filed by the defendant. Though the defendants have engaged the solicitors on their behalf, the larned Single Judge has noticed that inspite of service on the defendants, the written statement has not been filed. The learned Single Judge, therefore, proceeded under Order VIII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure and passed an ex parte decree on 12th September, 2005, which is [ 2 ] challenged in this Appeal. 2. The appeal has been presented to this Court on 20.11.2008. It appears that the appeal has been filed when the plaintiffs-respondents have placed the said decree for execution. It is noted that when the matter has been disposed of by an ex parte order, especially under Order VIII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the defendant was under an obligation to explain to this court, in grounds of the appeal, as to why the written statement could not be filed by the defendant inspite of the service and appearance of the defendants and their Solicitors. The grounds only disclose that the Solicitors were on record but the Solicitors have not filed the written statement; but what was the difficulty of the Solicitors in not filing the written statement within stipulated period and whether the defendants have given necessary instructions to the Solicitors to draft the written statement and to produce the same on record, is not disclosed in the grounds of the appeal. Though not explained, but assuming for the sake of arguments that the defendants-appellants have given all the instructions to their Solicitors, then what was the difficulty of the Solicitors in not filing the written statement has also not been explained. It is also not disclosed as to whether the client has asked the solicitors about the same. For years together, the [ 3 ] matter has remained without filing the written statement. The written statement, after appearance of the defendants, is expected to be filed within a reasonable time. Furthermore from time to time the defendants are expected to get the time to file the written statement extended. It is not disclosed that for how many times the time to file written statement was got extended after the statutory period till the matter was decided ex parte under Order VIII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure and thereby no case has been made out on behalf of the defendant-appellants which can be considered at the admission stage so that the matter can be considered sympathetically on behalf of the appellant-defendants and to remit back the same for trial. Even alongwith the appeal the proposed written statement has not been presented to this Court so that this Court could know what is the defence of the appellant. This is a case of gross negligence on the part of the appellant-defendants. Not only that but it is an attempt to harass the plaintiff who has got a decree after filing the suit in the year 1985 and got the fruits of litigation in the year 2005. 3. In the circumstances no case on merit for admission of the appeal has been made out. The appeal is rejected in limini. [A.A.Sayed, [A.A.Sayed, [A.A.Sayed, J.] J.] J.] [S.B.Mhase, [S.B.Mhase, [S.B.Mhase, J.] J.] J.]