JUDGMENT 1. - Heard the learned counsel for petitioner. 2. Defendant Nos. 1 to 15/petitioners have preferred this writ petition challenging the impugned order dated 17.2.2011 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) and judicial Magistrate, First Class, Roopwas, District Bharatpur in Civil Suit No. 59/2010, whereby the trial Court has closed their written statements and fixed the case for plaintiffs evidence. Petitioners have also challenged the order dated 17.2.2011 of the trial Court, whereby reply to application for temporary injunction has also been closed. 3. Submissions of the learned counsel for petitioners is that written statements of defendants have been closed within a period of 90 days, whereas right to file written statement is an important right. He further argued that even if there was delay in filing written statements on the part of petitioners, then the same could have been compensated by awarding cost to opposite party. Same arguments have been made with regard to closure of reply to temporary injunction application. 4. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for petitioners and also examined the impugned order passed by the trial Court as well as other documents placed on record. 5. Certified copies of the proceedings of the trial Court have also been placed on record and from the same, it is clear that defendant Nos. 1 to 15 appeared before the trial Court through their Advocate on 2.12.2010 and thereafter the case was fixed for 4.12.2010, 7.12.2010, 8.12.2010, 13.12.2010, 16.12.2010, 20.12.2010, 7.1.2011, 18.1.2011 and 27.1.2011. On 27.1.2011, the trial Court granted last opportunity to file written statement and fixed the case for 31.1.2011, but on that day also, written statement was not filed, since the Presiding Officer was on leave, therefore, the case was adjourned for 16.2.2011. The case was taken up on 17.2.2011 and since written statement was not filed, therefore, the trial Court closed the written statement observing that a last opportunity was granted to defendants, but they have not filed their written statements. 6. From the above narrated facts, it is clear that about 11 opportunities were granted to defendants to file written statements, but they filed to file the same despite grant of last opportunity, therefore, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order passed by the trial Court. 7. 6. From the above narrated facts, it is clear that about 11 opportunities were granted to defendants to file written statements, but they filed to file the same despite grant of last opportunity, therefore, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order passed by the trial Court. 7. However, I am of the view that right to file written statement is an important right and the suit has not been much delayed and right to file written statement has been closed within a period of 90 days. Although, the case was adjourned on 11 dates, but on 5 dates, the case was adjourned as Presiding Officer was not posted, on one date, the Presiding Officer was on leave, on one date, the members of Bar had suspended the judicial work and Presiding Officer was busy in recruitment process of Class IV employees and not a single opportunity was granted by the trial Court to file written statement on payment of cost, therefore, I think it fit and proper, in the interest of justice, that ends of justice would meet in case one more opportunity is granted to defendants to file their written statement as well as reply to temporary injunction application on payment of cost. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that according to him, reasonable amount of cost would be Rs. 3,000/-, which may be imposed, in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 17.2.2011 passed by the trial Court are set aside. Defendants/petitioners are permitted to file their written statement as well as reply to temporary injunction application within a period of three weeks from today, on payment of cost of Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees Three thousand only), which will be paid before or at the time of filing of written statement as well as reply to temporary injunction application to the opposite party, failing which the written statement and reply to temporary injunction application will not be taken on record and the impugned orders passed by the trial Court will remain as it is. 9. 9. Since this order has been passed without issuing notice to plaintiff/respondent so as to avoid further delay in the matter, a liberty is granted to respondent to move an application for modification/recalling of this order, in case he feels so aggrieved by this order.Writ petition allowed. *******