1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6911 OF 2008 Gangadhar Karbhari Gare & Anr ...Petitioners vs. Yashodabai Sakhahari Gare & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.R.A.Shelke i/b Mr.S.M.Sabrad for the petitioners Mr.R.N.Gite for respondent nos.1 and 2. CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 7, 2009 P.C. 1 Head the learned counsel for the petitioners who are first and eighth defendants and the learned counsel for the first and second respondent who are the original plaintiffs. Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage with a view to to ensure that the suit filed by the first and second respondents is not delayed. 2 By the impugned orders, applications made by the petitioners for setting aside the order passed by the trial court to proceed with the suit without written statement and for permitting the petitioners to file the written statement have been rejected by the trial court. 3 The second petitioner (8 th defendant) made an application at Exh.19 on 14 th February 2008 which has been rejected by passing the impugned order. The first 2 petitioner ((first defendant) made an application at Exh. 21 on 23 rd April 2008 which has been rejected by the impugned order. It appears that the summons was served to the petitioners on 14 th October 2007 and thereafter, applications made by the petitioners from time to time for grant of time to file the written statement. The trial court granted time in favour of the petitioners but the written statement was not filed within the stipulated period of 90 days. 4 The opposition of the learned counsel for the first and second respondents is on the ground that no exceptional reason or extraordinary cause has been set out by the petitioners and therefore, no interference can be made with the impugned order. 5 The case made out by the petitioners in their applications was that the perusal of certain old documents and old record was required for the purposes of filing the written statement. In fact, the earlier applications made by the petitioner for grant of time for filing written statements were on the ground that the documents were not available to enable the petitioners to draft their written statement. Considering the reasons stated in applications at Exh.19 and Exh.21, the trial court ought to have allowed the applications. 3 6 Though the petitioners deserve to be granted permission to file the written statement, the petitioners will have to pay heavy costs to the respondent nos.1 and 2. The amount of costs is quantified at Rs.7500/-. 7 Hence, I pass the following order : i) Impugned orders are quashed and set aside and the applications at Exh.19 and Exh.21 are allowed. ii)The petitioners shall pay total costs of Rs.7500/- to the respondent nos.1 and 2 within a period of eight weeks from today. The deposit of amount of costs with the trial court within stipulated time will be treated as sufficient compliance with this order. iii)Payment of costs will be a condition precedent. If compliance is not made, the order of dismissal of the applications at Exh.19 and 21 will stand. iv)Writ Petition is partly allowed in above terms. JUDGE