1 pps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATEJURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7301 OF 2011 Sopana Vithal Jagtap ...Petitioner Versus Mrs. Gaobai Bajirao Ghule ...Respondent Mr.Arvind Purohit for the Petitioner Mr.Pramod Pawar for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 CORAM:- R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED:- 21st SEPTEMBER, 2011. P.C. 1. Rule. 2. Rule made returnable forthwith. Learned Advocate Mr. Pawar appearing on behalf of the respondents waives service. By consent petition is taken up for hearing. 3. Regular Civil Suit No.702 of 1980 came to be filed by the respondent nos.1 to 3 in the Court of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune. The petitioner i.e. defendant no.2 filed written statement in due 2 course. Thereafter, by application dated 15.7.2011 at Exhibit 101 the present petitioner i.e. original defendant no.2 applied for amendment of the written statement, as according to the petitioner two new defences were required to be taken. The said application at Exhibit 101 has been rejected by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune by his Order dated 20th July, 2011, against which this petition is filed. 4. After reading the impugned order, it is noticed that the learned 4th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, permitted the petitioner to raise the first point, namely point regarding jurisdiction. The second point which is sought to be put up as and by way of amendment was rejected. The impugned order to that extent needs correction. I am inclined to allow this petition and allow the amendment application to say that petitioner can put up his defence raised through second point. 5. The court is informed that the respondents who are the plaintiffs have closed their case so far as recording of evidence is concerned. On account of the amendment of the written statement, if issues are 3 required to be recast the same will have to be done. Thereafter if the respondents wish to lead additional evidence, surely they should be permitted to do so. 6. Learned Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that the suit is of 1990 and therefore it will be proper if this court directs the learned trial Judge to hear and dispose of the suit at early date. Advocate for the petitioner stated that the petitioner will co-operate with the court in the matter in disposal of the suit at an early date. Hence following order is passed. ORDER i) Impugned order dated 20th July, 2011 passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune is set aside. ii) Application below Exhibit 101 for amendment of the written statement is granted. Amendment to be carried out on or before 3.10.2011. After the amendment to written statement is carried out, learned 4th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune would consider whether issues are required to be recast on the basis the amended written statement. For that, the learned Judge will hear both the 4 sides and pass an order accordingly. If the issues are recast and if the respondents 1 to 3 would like to lead additional evidence, such a permission will be granted, without the respondent nos.1 to 3 making formal application. Iii) Looking to the facts of the case, and the fact that the suit is of 1980, the learned 4th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune, shall hear and dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible, preferably before 31.12.2011. iv) Petition is disposed with no order as to costs. (R.Y.GANOO, J.)