IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO 1374 of 2007. SUIT NO 1374 of 2007. SUIT NO 1374 of 2007. Kamal R. Rajyadhyaksha through next friend Siddharth N. Dabholkar ..Plaintiff versus Kanta Patel & Others ..Defendants. And Mr. Vasu Bhagnani ..Applicant Alongwith Alongwith Alongwith TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO.59 OF 2006 TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO.59 OF 2006 TESTAMENTARY SUIT NO.59 OF 2006 IN IN IN TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO.349 OF 2006 TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO.349 OF 2006 TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO.349 OF 2006 Mukul M. Patel & Another ..Petitioner vs. Mr. Praful Kalelkar ..Caveator Mr.N.Y.Gupte for the Applicant Mr.B.R.Zaveri for defendant No.3 Coram : Coram : Coram : S.R.Sathe, JJ. S.R.Sathe, JJ. S.R.Sathe, JJ. Dated : 8th June, 2007 Dated : 8th June, 2007 Dated : 8th June, 2007 P.C. 1. Mentioned. Not on board. 2. Heard learned Advocate for the plaintiff as well as the learned Advocate for the defendant No.3. -2- The learned advocate submits that though there was direction to carry out the amendment immeidately, as the papers were not available, the amendment was not carried out and as such he may be allowed to carry out the amendment on or before 14th of this month. 3. Hence, Plaintiff to carry out the amendment on or before 14th June, 2007. (S.R.Sathe, J.) (S.R.Sathe, J.) (S.R.Sathe, J.)