Raj Kishore Prasad, J.

1. This application, in revision, by defendant 3, Binda Prasad, is directed against the order of the court below rejecting his written statement.

2. The sole question for determination is, whether the written statement, filed by the petitioner, long after the settlement of the issues, should be accepted?

3. The facts are these: On the 27th April, 1957, the plaintiff filed a mortgage suit, claiming a sum of Rs. 1,36,124.17 nP., on account of overdraft advances, against the petitioner, defendant 3; his father, defendant 1; and, his brother, defendant 2. On the 21st December, 1957, defendant 2, and, on the 27th February, 1958, defendant 1, filed their respective written statements. Next day, that is, on the 28th February, 1958, issues were settled. Defendant 3, however, did not, till that stage, appear, or, file any written statement.

4. More than two years later, five special witnesses, namely, P. W. 1, P. W. 2 and P. W. 3, on the 19th April, 1960; P. W. 4, on the 9th August, 1960; and, P. W. 5, on the 10th August, 1960, were examined by the plaintiff, and, cross-examined by defendants 1 and 2.

5. After the examination of the aforesaid last special witn