ORDER 1. HEARD LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES.

2. LEAVE GRANTED.

3. WE FIND THAT THE DIRECTIONS FOR CONSIDERING THE QUESTION RELATING TO ORDER 7 RULE 11 CPC AS PRELIMINARY ISSUE IS NOT CORRECT AS THAT WOULD NECESSITATE FILING OF A WRITTEN STATEMENT. IT IS A SETTLED POSITION IN LAW THAT WHILE DEALING WITH AN APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 7 RULE 11 CPC, CONSIDERATION OF WRITTEN STATEMENT IS NOT A CONDITION PRECEDENT AND ONLY AVERMENTS IN THE PLAINT HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED. THEREFORE, THAT PART OF THE ORDER IS SET ASIDE. IT WILL BE IN THE INTEREST OF THE PARTIES IF THE WHOLE SUIT IS TAKEN UP FOR DISPOSAL AS EARLY AS PRACTICABLE. CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE SUIT WAS FILED IN 1996, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES SUBMIT THAT THEY SHALL COOPERATE IN DISPOSAL OF THE SUIT, AND IF A REQUEST IS MADE TO THE TRIAL COURT FOR DISPOSAL OF THE SUIT WITHIN SIX MONTHS, THAT WOULD SUFFICE.

4. THE APPEAL IS DISPOSED OF ACCORDINGLY.