KBP 3204-09.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3204 OF 2009 Vishnu Yesu Chorage and ors. ..Petitioners Vs. Shivaji Vishnu Chorage ..Respondent ......... Mr.Bhutekar i/b.Mr.U.P.Warunjikar, for petitioners. Mr.Dilip Badake, for respondent. ......... CORAM : A.S.OKA, J.. DATE : 18 th August, 2009. P.C. : 1] Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. The petitioners are original defendants and respondents is original plaintiff. The respondent – plaintiff filed a suit for partition and separate possession. The said suit was dismissed by the trial court. The respondent preferred an appeal before the District Court. In the said appeal, an application for amendment of plaint was moved by the respondent. By order impugned, the said application has been allowed. 2] The contention of the petitioners is that the proposed amendment totally changes the nature of suit and the same is barred by limitation. 3] Apart from the fact that the impugned order being an interlocutory order is capable of being challenged in an appeal which may be preferred against the decree passed by the appellate court, the petitioners can always file an additional written statement and raise a contention regarding the bar of limitation. Even if the amendment is allowed, the issue of bar of limitation KBP 3204-09.sxw 2 always remains open which may be agitated by the petitioners by filing written statement. 4] Subject to what is observed above, the writ petition is not entertained and the same is rejected. ( A.S.OKA, J. )