P.K. Lohra, J. - (1.) THE petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dt. 31st August, 2012 (Annex. 3), whereby the learned trial Court has declined to accept the written statement tendered by the petitioner on the ground that the written statement was filed after a lapse of 90 days. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there were bona fide reasons for not filing written statement within time, and therefore, the impugned order is unjust and the same is liable to be quashed and set aside.
(2.) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has opposed the prayer and has submitted that the petitioner -defendant has shown total callousness in defending his cause and has not cared to file written statement for almost two years, and therefore, no indulgence can be granted to the petitioner. I have considered the rival submissions and after examining Order 8 Rule 1 CPC, I deem it just and appropriate to direct the learned trial Court to take on record the written statement submitted by the petitioner subject to payment of cost of Rs. 2, 000/ -. Accordingly, the order impugned is set aside and the petitioner is directed to pay cost of Rs. 2, 000/ - to the respondent -plaintiff within a week. The trial Court may proceed after taking written statement on record in accordance with law. No order as to costs. ;