S.K. Mishra, J. The Petitioner, who is the Opposite Party No.1 before the Court below in M.A.C No.64 of 2011, pending in the Court of District Judge-cum-1st M.A.C.T, Jharsuguda, has preferred the present Writ Petition challenging the order dated 27.12.2016, whereby an application filed by the Petitioner under Order 9 Rule 7 of C.P.C. to set aside the ex-parte order dated 03.04.2014 and accept his Written Statement was rejected.

Page 2 of 14 2.

The brief background facts, as emerged from the record, are that the Opposite Party Nos.1 to 4 filed M.A.C. No.64 of 2011 in the Court of District Judge-cum-1st M.A.C.T., Jharsuguda claiming compensation due to vehicular accident of the husband of Opposite Party No.1. The Petitioner, being the owner of the offending vehicle, on being noticed, though entered appearance in the said case, but could not filed his Written Statement for which, he was set ex-parte on 03.04.2014. Thereafter, the Petitioner filed the Written Statement along with a Petition under Order 9 Rule 7 of C.P.C. on or about 04.09.2015 praying therein to set aside the ex-parte order passed against him so also to accept the Written Statement taking a