1 wp5851-11.sxw jpc/- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5851 OF 2011 Pralhad R. Bansode and others .. Petitioners Versus Jaywant V. Oak .. Respondent Mr. Prashant More for the Petitioner CORAM: R. M. BORDE, J. DATED : 24th August, 2011 P. C. 1. An application tendered by the defendants, petitioners herein at Exh.70 in Regular Civil Suit No. 36 of 2010 seeking amendment to the written statement has been turned down by the 17th Joint Civil Judge Pune, in view of the order passed on5th April, 2011 and the said order is a subject matter of challenge in this petition. 2. The defendants who claim to have been put in possession of the disputed property are seeking amendment in the nature of correction in respect of the year of putting them in possession of the disputed property. The plaintiff wants to contend that instead of the year '1996' mentioned in 2 wp5851-11.sxw the written statement in respect of his putting them in possession of the disputed property same be substituted as '1995' . The plaintiff has presented the suit claiming his entitlement based on the sale deed executed by the predecessor in title. Whereas the defendant is claiming his entitlement to the property on the basis of an oral agreement arrived at between him and the said predecessor in title of the property and further claimed that he has been put in possession in pursuance to the alleged oral agreement. 3. The application seeking amendment is tendered after a completion of recordings of the evidence and of the plaintiff as well as he defendant. Considering the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in Vidyabai & others Vs. Padmalata and others, 2009 AIR, SC 1433, the trial court has proceeded to reject the application. 4. I have perused the impugned order as well the application tendered by the defendants. In my opinion, the trial court has taken a reasonable approach in the mater and the order passed by the trial Court cannot be said to be erroneous or improper. In exercise of the power conferred 3 wp5851-11.sxw under article 227 of the Constitution of India, no case is made out for causing interference. 5. The petition is devoid of substance, hence stands rejected. ( R. M. BORDE, J.)