IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 5120 OF 200 WRIT PETITION NO. 5120 OF 200 WRIT PETITION NO. 5120 OF 2007 Kishor Laxmanrao Sanas .... Petitioner versus Ms.Jyoti Namdeo Dhamdhere & ors...... Respondent. Shri Nitin P. Deshpande for the petitioner CORAM; A.P. DESHPANDE, J. CORAM; A.P. DESHPANDE, J. CORAM; A.P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED; 9TH JULY, 2007 DATED; 9TH JULY, 2007 DATED; 9TH JULY, 2007 P.C.; P.C.; P.C.; 1. The plaintiff/respondent who has filed suit for specific performance of contract, had not initially claimed the decree for refundable earnest money. However, by moving an amendment application a prayer for refund of earnest money and damages is made only against respondent no.1. The said amendment has been allowed. The court permitted carrying out consequential amendment. The present petitioner who is defendant no.2 tried to make out altogether different case in the written statement, by travelling beyond the scope of the amended plaint. The trial court was of the view that the defendant no.2 should have restricted himself to the amended plaint, andhas directed striking off para 1 of additional written statement. 2. Perused the order. The same does not call for any interference. Hence writ petition is summarily dismissed. 3. At this stage the leartned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner proposes to move an independent applicaiton seeking amendment of the written statement. If that is so, it shall be open for the petitioner to move appropriate application and the trial court shall decide the same in acordance with the law. ...