Shri. Uday Bhupal Raynade (Since Decd.) Through Lrs. And ORS. v. Shri. Babaso Kallappa Girmal And ORS.

LSP 1 19 wp 6401.21.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.6401 of 2021 Shri Uday Bhupal Raynade & ors.

...

Petitioners V/s.

Babaso Kallappa Girmal & ors.

...

Respondents.

Ms. Pallavi Karanjkar i/b. Sachin K. Hande Advocate for the Petitioners Mr. P.M. Arjunwadkar Advocate for Respondent No.8.

Digitally signed by LATA SUNIL PANJWANI Date:

2024.12.07 11:40:34 +0530 CORAM : S.M. MODAK, J LATA SUNIL PANJWANI DATE : 27 November 2024.

P.C. :

Heard learned Advocate for the Petitioner-Plaintiff and learned Advocate for Respondent No.8/Defendant No.8.

2.

Respondent No.8 could not file the written-statement within the statutory period. The trial Court proceeded with the hearing of the suit without written-statement against her and few others as per the order dated 15 February 2016. She applied for setting aside on 20 January 2018 (Page-29). The trial Court allowed the application subject to cost of Rs.2000/- as per the order dated 21 September 2018. This order is challenged by the Petitioner-Plaintiff by way of this writ petition filed in the year 2019 (Petition is numbered in the year 2021).

LSP 2 19 wp 6401.21.doc 3.

I have read the impugned order. The sole reason for which the no written-statement order was set aside is the age of Defendant No.8. She is running 75-80 years old. If it is so then there are several restrictions on her every moment including contacting the Advocate, giving instructions and filing written-statement. 4.

Considering this fact, I do not think that the discretion is exercised wrongly by the trial Court. Hence, no interference is warranted. Writ Petition is dismissed.

(S.M. MODAK, J.)