The respondents No.1 to 5 were substituted as defendants on 8.1.2010. However, they were not allowed to file written statement. The respondents No.1 to 5 had challenged the said order before this Court. whereupon, this court while dismissing the said petition as withdrawn extended liberty to them to move an application afresh for seeking permission to file written statement before the trial court. Again, they moved an application for filing written statement. However, the said application was also dismissed vide order dated 19.12.2011 which was also challenged before this court. This Court vide order dated 9.8.2012 accepted the revision petition, set aside the impugned order and directed the trial court to dispose of the application while considering the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Sumitibai & Others vs. Paras Finance Co. Regd. Partnership Firm, AIR 2007 Supreme Court 3166 . After considering the said judgment, the trial court allowed the application and permitted him to file written statement. Since the written statement filed by the defendant-vendor after the execution of the sale deed was in the shape of admission of agreement, therefore, the petitioners could establish their rights by challenging the allegations as set up against Ramesh Chand as well as the subsequent vendee. This court do not deem it appropriate to interfere in the discretion exercised by the trial court, allowing the
