On the last date of hearing, I directed learned counsel for the petitioners to produce the written statement duly signed by the petitioners atleast before this Court. Today, a duly signed written statement by defendant No.1 as adopted by defendant No.2, which appears to be prepared on 06.03.2012, and signed by defendant Nos.1 and 2 respectively is produced before the court. The copy of the said written statement has been served on the counsel for the respondent/plaintiff as well. Whatever be the communication gap between the petitioners and their counsel, particularly, with reference to the proceedings before the lower court on 07.03.2012, the fact remains that the impugned order noting that condition of filing written statement as not having been complied, does not appear to be vitiated. However, the suit being one for specific performance, where substantive rights of the parties are required to be adjudicated, in my opinion, one opportunity deserves to be granted to the petitioners in the interest of justice. However, for the lapse on the part of the petitioners in not proceeding with the suit diligently, the respondent/plaintiff needs to be compensated appropriately by suitable costs.
