JUDGMENT Shree Chandrashekhar, J. - Learned counsel for the petitioners is absent. 2. Petitioners are aggrieved of order dated 07.04.2012 in Title Suit No. 34 of 2006 by which written statement filed by the substituted representative of the defendant has not been accepted. 3. In this context Order XXII Rule 4(2) CPC is relevant. It provides that any person made a party on death of one of several defendants or of the sole defendant may make any defence appropriate to his character as "legal representative" of the deceased defendant. 4. After this writ petition was filed on 30.04.2012, no step for early hearing of the writ petition was taken by the petitioners. In fact, on 17.05.2012 and 13.06.2012 when the writ petition was listed for hearing, it was adjourned at the instance of the petitioners. 5. In the above facts, the writ petition is dismissed.