AMBAR FORGE PVT LTD Vs. MADHUKAR KHANDERAO JAGTAP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order dated 27th February 2008 records that this Writ Petition will be disposed of finally at the stage of admission.

(2.) The petitioners are the defendants in the suit filed by the Respondents. The suit was filed in the year 2003. The Petitioners appeared in the suit on 6th February 2004. An order was passed by the learned trial Judge on 3rd September 2004 directing that the suit will proceed without the written statement of the petitioners. An application was made on 5th October 2004 by the petitioners seeking permission of the court to file the written statement. The said application was rejected by order dated 19th August 2005. On 18th October 2006, an application was made by the Petitioners in which it was again prayed that the written statement of the petitioners be taken on record. The said application was rejected by order dated 5th February 2007.

(3.) The contention of the Advocate for the Petitioners is that a case of existence of the extraordinary circumstances warranting grant of extension of time to file written statement was made out in the application dated 5th October 2004 at Exh.13. He submitted that without considering the grounds made out in the said application, it was rejected. He submitted that though one more application was made before the trial court, the same was rejected on the ground that the earlier application at Exh.13 was rejected. 3. The submission of the learned counsel for the Respondent-plaintiff is that the order dated 19th August 2005 passed below Exh.13 was never challenged by the petitioners and in October 2006, they filed a fresh application before the trial court which has been rightly rejected. He placed reliance on the decision of this court in case of Shailaja A. Sawant & others vs. Sayajirao G. Patil [(2004 (5) Bombay Cases Reporter page 548]. He submitted that the petitioners are guilty of latches and no interference is called for in a petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India.