Mahesh Bhagwati, J. - (1.) Heard.
(2.) By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has beseeched to quash and set aside the order dated 14th December, 2010 whereby the learned trial Court allowed the application of the defendant filed under Order 8 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of CPC and allowed the written statement to be taken on record, with the cost of Rs.1000/-.
(3.) Learned counsel canvassed that the suit came to be filed on 30th July, 2008 and the defendant-petitioner put in his appearance in the Court on next date. He was required to file the written statement within the stipulated period of thirty days from the date of service of summons on him and further within the extended time falling within 90 days, but the defendant filed the written statement on 7th September, 2009 whereas the right to file the written statement had been closed by the Court on 13th January, 2009. The learned trial Court has not assigned any reason for allowing the application filed under Order 8 Rule 10 of CPC. Hence, the impugned order deserves to be set aside. He has cited two judgments rendered in the cases of M/s Aditya Hotels (P) Ltd. v. Bombay Swadeshi Stores Ltd. & Ors. reported in AIR 2007 SC, 1574 and Mohammed Yusuf v. Faij Mohammad & Ors. reported in AIR 2009 SC(Supp) 1741, in support of his arguments.;