4. Considering the rival contentions of the parties, this Court finds, there is no dispute that the suit was posted to 18.02.2020 and there is clear averment by the defendant that on the date of posting of the suit he was ill, which became an impediment for the defendant to appear in the Court. This Court here finds substance in the submission of Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the Opposite Parties that even assuming that the defendant was ill on 18.02.2020, nothing prevented the defendant to approach the trial court at least within a reasonable time. However at this stage considering the nature of the suit involved and for the opinion of this Court, if such nature of the suit is allowed to be concluded ex parte , there will be serious prejudice and there may be further legal complications between the parties in several courts, to avoid any further loss of time and also further complications, this Court finds, the suit requires a contest disposal. At the same time the plight of the plaintiffs is also to be kept in mind not only for the delayed attempt by the defendant but also involvement of a mechanical application therein. As a whole, keeping in view the prejudice to the defendant, in the event the suit is allowed to be decided ex parte , this Court interferes in the impugned order and sets aside the same and at the same time this Court also permits the defendant to file written statement at least within a period of ten days from today.
