1 wp10584.10 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 10584 OF 2010 _____________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | appearances, Court's | Court’s or Judge’s orders orders or | directions and | Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________________ Mr. N.V. Gaware holding for Mr. S.N. Gaikwad, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.B.W. Khan, Advocate for respondent nos.1 to 3. 1. Heard Advocates Mr. Gaware for petitioner and Mr. M.B.W.Khan for respondent nos.1 to 3. 2. In a suit instituted in 2010, shortly after appearance of respondents, prayer for amendment was made. The effort was to point out that brother of petitioner had paid deposit of Rs. 5,50,000/- to the earlier owner Mr. Kodam. That application has been rejected by the trial Court after observing that neither the said brother nor earlier owner are parties to the suit. 3. Mr. Gaware states that suit is only for injunction with a view to protect possession of petitioner over the suit premises and petitioner-plaintiff also claims status as 2 wp10584.10 tenant therein. 4. Advocate Mr. Khan for respondents has supported the order. 5. After hearing Counsel for the parties, I find that the petitioner claims to be in possession of the suit property and is trying to work out a right because of alleged deposit by his brother with earlier owner Shri. Kodam. The relevance of the story can not be disputed. Truth therein is totally irrelevant at this stage. The respondents can raise appropriate defences in their written statement as and when same is filed. I therefore find that the trial Court erred in not allowing such application. 6. Application at Exhibit-29 in R.C.S. No. 162 of 2010 is therefore allowed. The petitioner-plaintiff shall carry out the amendment by 14th February, 2011. Liberty to respondents to file their written statement or then to amend appropriately if it is already filed. 7. The Writ Petition is thus allowed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no order as to costs. (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE. 27.01.2011 gas/wp10584.10