:1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1829 OF 2008 OF MOTION NO. 1829 OF 2008 OF MOTION NO. 1829 OF 2008 IN IN IN SUIT SUIT SUIT NO. 3046 OF 1988 NO. 3046 OF 1988 NO. 3046 OF 1988 M/s. H.D. Trading Co. & Anr. ...Plaintiffs. V/s. The Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay & Anr. ... Defendants. None for the Plaintiffs. Mr. P. Khandhar i/b. Mulla & Mulla for Defendant No.1. Ms. N.A. Sumnani i/b. Bhatt & Saldanha for Defendant No.2. ..... CORAM CORAM CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. 30TH 30TH 30TH SEPTEMBER 2008. SEPTEMBER 2008. SEPTEMBER 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : . The Plaintiff’s Advocate are absent. I am informed that the motion has been duly served. There is no reply affidavit filed by the Plaintiff nor their Advocate is present. The request in this notice of motion is to take on record the written statement in a suit filed in the year 1988. The affidavit in support states that the written statement was ready in 2005 and duly forwarded with the consent request in writing to the Plaintiffs and their Advocate. The Plaintiff did not endorse their consent on the request made to them and that is how the written statement though affirmed has not been filed. :2: 2. Ms. Sumnani urged that there is no negligence or inaction but under a genuine and bonafide impression that the claim of the Plaintiffs does not lie or cannot be enforced against Defendant No.2 that the present written statement was not filed earlier. Thereafter, Defendant No.2 was advised to file written statement and raise their objection to maintainability of the suit that is how the written statement has been filed. 3. After perusing the Notice of Motion and the affidavit in support, the grounds therein are hardly tenable or can be termed as sufficient cause for delay. However, in order not to deprive Defendant No.2 of their valuable right to defend the Suit claim so also the Plaintiffs are absent that the writen statement is taken on record on Defendant No.2 paying costs quantified at Rs.7,500/- to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority. Costs to be paid within a period of two weeks from today. Written statement shall be accepted by the office and thereafter, the suit will proceed in accordance with law. If compliance is made with this direction, the Notice of Motion stand dismissed without further reference to the Court. (S.C. (S.C. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.)