1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Letters Patent Appeal No. 314/2007 in Writ Petition No. 3447/2007 Jamil Hussain Biabani s/o Mohd. Abid Hussain Biabani ...vs.. Mohd. Abid Hussain s/o Abdul Rahman Biabani and others -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM: K. J. ROHEE & R. V. MORE, JJ. DATED : 20 th February, 2008 1. Heard the appellant in person and Mr. Habibuddin, learned counsel for respondent No. 6. 2. The appellant filed a suit against the respondents, six in number. Out of them, respondent Nos. 1 to 5 filed their written statement, however, respondent No. 6 did not file her written statement and the suit proceeded without her written statement. Once, her application for time to file written statement was rejected by the trial Court and subsequently by order dated 04.04.2002 the trial Court allowed her to file written statement subject to costs of Rs.100/-. 3. Respondent No. 6 did not pay the costs hence her written statement was not taken on record. It seems that thereafter respondent No. 6 moved application for grant of 2 permission to pay costs of Rs. 100/-. The trial Court rejected said application by detailed order dated 05.01.2004. Respondent No. 6 challenged the order by filing Writ Petition No. 344/2007, which was allowed by the learned Single Judge by order dated 06.09.2007 by imposing costs of Rs.500/- on respondent No. 6. The said order of the learned Single Judge is now challenged by the appellant. 4. It may be seen that all the defendants except respondent No. 6 have filed their written statement and they are contesting the suit. In view of these circumstances, we find that there would not be any prejudice if respondent No. 6 is permitted to file her written statement by paying costs, though payment thereof is delayed. We find no substance in the appeal. The same is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE kahale