kbp 1 2921-08.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2921 OF 2008 Sidhram Venkatnarasayya Pittal ..Petitioners Vs. Santosh Prasad Shah ..Respondents ......... Mr.Milind Parab i/b.M/s.Milind Parab and Associates, for petitioner. Mr.C.G.Togani, for respondent. ....... CORAM : A.S.OKA, J.. DATE : 7 th OCTOBER, 2009. P.C. : 1] Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2] The Petitioner filed a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. An application for amendment of the plaint was made by the Petitioner. The said application was made after filing of the affidavit in lieu of examination in chief. The amendment sought was for treating the suit as one filed under the general law. The said application has been rejected by the impugned order. 3] Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the entire evidence has been recorded, and therefore, there is no prejudice to the respondent defendant if amendment is allowed. He submitted that the trial court ought to have taken a liberal view of the matter and allowed the amendment. 4] The trial court has noted in the impugned order that the petitioner filed evidence close purshis at exhibit 50 and thereafter the present application has been filed. It is observed that the amendment will change the nature of the suit and will cause prejudice to the respondent. kbp 2 2921-08.sxw 5] The suit filed by the petitioner is under Section 6 of the said Act of 1963. Even after disposal of the suit, the parties are entitled to bring a fresh suit on the basis of the title. In the circumstances, no fault can be found with the impugned order. 6] Subject to what is observed above, the writ petition is rejected. ( A.S.OKA, J. )