- (1.) By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has beseeched to quash and set aside the order dated 13th July, 2011 whereby the learned trial Court closed the right of the petitioner-defendant to file the written statement of defence.
(2.) Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the relevant material on record, it is noticed that the plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for eviction and demand of the rent against the respondent No.1. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner-defendant No.1 Tahkurji Mandir Shri Narsing Ji Maharaj through Mahant and Manager Haridas was impleaded to be a party defendant on 6th March, 2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner-defendant put his appearance on behalf of the petitioner-defendant on 5th March, 2010. He was provided sufficient time to file the written statement of defence, but failed to file the same till 13th July 2011 and finally on 13th July, 2011, the Court closed the petitioner's right to file the written statement. Learned counsel for the petitioner canvassed that he was impleaded to be party defendant in the suit vide order dated 6th March, 2009. Till 19th April, 2011, he was not supplied a copy of the plaint and he could not obtain the copies also, hence, he could not file the written statement of defence in time. It is true that he was afforded ample opportunity and sufficient time to file the reply and he could not file the same, but now he may be given the last opportunity to file the written statement in the interest of justice and if necessary, cost may be imposed on him, failing which he shall be deprived of seeking justice.
(3.) It is true that a period of more than one and a half years was given to the petitioner to file the written statement, but he did not file the same.;