G.S. Kulkarni, J.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Petitioner no.1 who is defendant no. 3 and petitioner no. 2 who is defendant no. 1 in the eviction suit being R.A.E. & R. Suit No. 1022/1558 of 2009 instituted by the respondents against the petitioners are before the Court challenging the order dated 24 August 2015 passed by the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court, Mumbai, whereby the application of petitioner no. 2/defendant no. 1 for reopening of the evidence of the defendants, by allowing defendant no. 3 to file his affidavit of examination-in-chief and to be cross examined by the plaintiffs, stands rejected.

2. In nutshell the facts are:

On 4 September 2009 the respondents landlords filed the suit in question in the Small Causes Court at Mumbai against the petitioners (defendant no.3 and defendant no. 1) and one Smt. Sindhumati Pathak (defendant no. 2). It is not in dispute that all the defendants had appeared in the suit in response to the suit summons.

3. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred as they stand before the trial Court.

4. A written statement was filed on behalf of defendant nos.1 and 2 as also a separate written statement was filed