them from hling written staLement. Moreover, there was delay of 12 years delay in the case cited supra and whereas, there is no such delay in the case on hand. The trial Cour[ has forfeited the right of the revision peti tioners / delendants to file written statement on 27 .O3.2OI9 and the revision petitioncrs/ defendants Iiled the pctilion in the month of August, 2019. On 78.02.2079 the plaintifl has filed amended plaint and thereby the case was adjourned to 22.O2.2O 19 and on the said date the case was adjourned to 08.03.2O19 at the request of the defendants. The impugned order in this case discloses that on 08.03.2019 the defendants did not hle a,ny written statement, however, a memo was hled by the plaintiff stating that CRP No.11O of 2O15 lr'as allou,ed. The trial Court recorded the memo and adjourned to I9-O3.2O19. On 19.03.2019 the case was adjourned to 27 .O3.2O 19 at the request of the defendant, however, on 27 .O3.2O 19 the defendants failed to file written statement. Thus, it is evident that the defendants / revision petitioners failed to file written statement and took adjournments on four occasions i.e., on 22.02.2019, O8.O3.2019, 19.O3.2O19 and 27.O3.2O 19. It is not the case of responden t/ plaintiff that thc defendants were not represented on the above said four occasions. It is on the request of the dqfendants, the trial Court has adjourned the case. The trial )
