: 1 : cwp-3144-11=.sxw USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3144 OF 2011 Vedant Hitesh Sanghavi .. Petitioner v/s. Avi Vedant Sanghavi .. Respondent ......... Mr. A.R. Pande for the petitioner ......... CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATE : 21st APRIL, 2011 P.C. : 1. The petitioner herein has filed M.J. Petition No. A-1750 of 2008 in the Family Court at Bombay on 4th August, 2008 on the ground of cruelty. According to the petitioner the respondent-wife deserted the petitioner on 10th September, 2007. The petitioner filed an application for amendment so as to incorporate the ground of desertion in the petition which was already filed. That application was filed on 21st October, 2010. That application was decided by the learned Judge of the Family Court on 14th March, 2011. The said application for amendment was rejected. The petitioner has challenged this order dated 14th March, 2011. 2. I have heard learned Counsel Mr. Pande appearing on behalf of the petitioner at the stage of admission. The learned Judge has in the impugned order observed that on the day when the main petition was : 2 : cwp-3144-11=.sxw filed i.e. on 4th August, 2008, no cause of action was available to the petitioner on the ground of desertion as the period of desertion as alleged would come to an end on or about 9th September, 2007. The learned Judge has rightly considered the relevant dates and has rejected the said application. If on the date of the filing of the petition i.e. 4th August, 2008, the cause of action for instituting the petition under desertion was not available, the said ground cannot be urged in the said petition filed on 4th August, 2010 though at a latter point of time the petitioner may claim that the petitioner has a cause of action on the ground of desertion after a period of 2 years from 10th September, 2007. The argument advanced by learned Counsel Mr. Pande that the impugned order is wrong cannot be accepted. The learned Judge has taken a correct view of the matter and the order does not require interference. Hence, following order is passed. ORDER (i) Petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs. (R.Y.GANOO, J.)