Judgment By way of this Writ Petition, the petitioner has sought a writ or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 08-02-2005 passed by the respondent no. 1 partly. 2. Brief facts giving rise to this writ petition are that the respondent no. 2 filed a Original Suit No. 108 of 2003 against the petitioners. 3. The petitioners could not appear before the court below in that suit hence the court below passed the order dated 06-08-2004 proceeding ex-parte against the defendant/petitioners. 4. The petitioners thereafter moved an application under Order 9 Rule 7 read with Section 151 of C.P.C. for setting aside the order dated 06-08-2004 and permitted him to file written statement. 5. The learned trial court allowed the application 38 C filed by the defendant/petitioners under Order 9 Rule 7 of C.P.C. on payment of cost Rs. 100/ - but directed that the written statement filed by the defendant/petitioners after a period of 90 days will not be made a part of the suit. The trial court accordingly recalled the ex-parte order dated 06-08-2004. 6. Feeling aggrieved against the impugned order dated 06-08-2004, this writ petition has been filed. 7. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. 8. The Hon'ble Apex Court in a decision cited in 2005 (3) Supreme Order VIII Rule 1 of the C.P.C. is directory in nature, hence power of court to extend time for filing the written statement beyond the time schedule is not completely taken away. 9. In view of the aforesaid decision, the trial court has to consider whether the applicant has satisfactorily explained the reason for filing the written statement beyond time or not and in case, if the trial court comes to the conclusion that the delay has been satisfactorily explained then the trial court may permit the defendant to file his written statement. It is not expected from the trial court to decide the application merely on the ground that the written statement cannot be filed beyond a period of 90 days only. 10. With these observations, I accordingly partly allow the Writ Petition and set aside the order dated 08-02-2005 passed by the Respondent no. 1 in Original Suit No. 108 of 2003. 11. 10. With these observations, I accordingly partly allow the Writ Petition and set aside the order dated 08-02-2005 passed by the Respondent no. 1 in Original Suit No. 108 of 2003. 11. With these modifications that the trial court shall decide the application afresh on the point of extension of time beyond a period of 90 days in filing the written statement as well as the same be made admissible in the evidence in the light of the observation made by the Hon'ble Apex Court as has been cited by me in the body of the judgment. 12. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of finally.