Lsp IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2221 of 2009 M/s. Sagar Mills through Proprietor Mulchand Phulchand Picha ...Petitioner v/s. Harakchand Nanchand Vohora ...Respondent Mr. Madhav Jamdar for the petitioner. CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. DATED DATED DATED : MARCH 05, 2009 : MARCH 05, 2009 : MARCH 05, 2009 P.C. . Heard Counsel for the Petitioner. 2. The fact that the suit for recovery of paltry amount of Rs. 73,257/- pertains to the year 1995 by itself cannot be the basis to exempt the plaintiff from substituting legal heirs of deceased defendant. The Exparte decree passed against the deceased defendant, it is common ground, has been set aside. The suit now stands restored to the file of the trial Court which has to proceed in accordance with law. It would have been a different matter if the Petitioners were to argue that the heirs who will be impleaded in the place of deceased-defendant should not be permitted to file written-statement as their pre-decessor had not filed the same on the argument that no written-statement order has become final. 2 3. That is a matter which can be still be considered by the trial Court if so insisted by the Petitioners. However, merely because no written-statement order has become final against the original defendant or that the suit pertains to year 1995 and involve only paltry amount of Rs. 73,257/- cannot be the sole basis to hold that it was a fit case to exempt the Petitioner-plaintiff from the necessity of substituting the legal representatives of the deceased-defendant once the exparte decree has been set aside and suit is restored to the file in terms of order passed by this Court. 4. Accordingly, Petition is disposed of on the above terms. [A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.] [A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.] [A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.]