1 941.nms.3366.09.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ata NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3366 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO.4105 OF 1994 Krystal Avenue Co-operative Housing Society Ltd and ors .. Plaintiff s V/s. R.N.A.Builders and ors. .. Defendants _____________________ Mr.C.P.Deogirikar,for the plaintiff Mr.Dinyar Madon Sr.Adv.a/w Mr.D.V.Deokar a/w Mr.Pinakin Modi i/b M/s Parimal K.Shroff and co in support in N/M 3366/09, for defendant no.1 Mr.Shirsekar i/b A.H.Chheda and ors ,for defendant no.2 in support in N/M 509/07 CORAM :R.M.SAVANT J. DATE :21st March,2011 P.C.:- By the above Notice of Motion , the defendant no.1 prays that delay of about 3427 in filing Written Statement in the above Suit be condoned, and the Written Statement be taken on record by setting aside the order dated 19th April, 2000. The reasons for the delay in filing the Written Statement are mentioned in the affidavit in support of the Notice of Motion. The said reasons can be culled out from paragraph nos.3,4,5, and 6 of the Affidavit in support . 2 941.nms.3366.09.sxw 2. The sum and substance of the reasons is that defendant no.1 was not aware of the Suit being notified for non-filing of the Written statement. The defendant no.1 came aware of the same only on 20th December,2006 when the Suit was shown under the caption of “undefended suits”. 3. It is required to be noted that the parties have been negotiating, considering the reliefs sought in the Suit i.e.of conveyance of the property in question. It is pertinent to note that the plaintiff has also not filed any application for an ex- parte decree being passed though the Suit was categorized as “ an undefended suit” in the year 2000. 4) In my view, though there is strong objection of the plaintiff to the Written statement of the defendant no.1 being taken on record, in view of the fact that the Suit has not progressed, no prejudice would be caused to the plaintiff and in fact the interest of justice would be served if the Written Statement is taken on record. The Notice of Motion is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). In my view, the interest of justice would also require that the plaintiffs are compensated. The defendant no.1, therefore, to pay cost of Rs. 5,000/- to the plaintiff society within a period of two weeks from date, only on defendant no.1 producing evidence of having paid the said costs that the benefits of this order would 3 941.nms.3366.09.sxw ensure to the defendant no.1 and the office would then take the Written Statement filed by the defendant no.1 on record. If such costs are not paid within the time stipulated by this court, the Notice of Motion No.509 of 2007 filed by the defendant no. 2, would be deemed to have been dismissed. (R.M.Savant,J.)