1. ' S. USMAN ALI SHAFT, J.--This petition for leave to appeal is directed from the order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 12-5-1986, whereby the writ petition of the petitioner was dismissed.
2. ' The respondents were asked to file their written statement on 12-2-1985 by the Court. At about 11- 30 a.m. a request was made to extend the date for filing the written statement on the same day, when the Court ordered striking off the defence. Later on, at about 3-00 p.m. The respondents' written statement alongwith an application requesting for the recalling the order of striking off the defence was submitted at the Court. The learned trial Judge vide his order dated 18-5-1985 turned down the said request. On revision petition before the Additional District Judge, the order of the trial Court was set aside, held that the filing of the written statement was in due compliance of the order of the Court and the striking off the defence order till 4.00 p.m. Closing hours of the Court is unwarranted. A writ petition was filed against the order of the Additional District Judge who allowed the respondents to file the written statement on the date fixed by the Court for that purpose. The same was dismissed in limine.
3. ' The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the respondents have deliberately avoided to submit the written statement and the subsequent thought of filing the same was a delaying tactic and under such circumstances the Additional District Judge had no authority to give an opportunity to the respondents to file the written statement, and thus the order passed by him is totally without jurisdiction, mala fide and without authority.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for petitioner, we have come to the conclusion that the learned Judge of the High Court while dismissing the writ petition in limine, rightly held that no defect in the order of District Judge was pointed out to interfere in the constitutional jurisdiction and the order of the Additional District Judge was held to be proper and needed no interference. The learned counsel failed to show us any legal defect. The petition has no merit and is accordingly dismissed.