1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA Writ Petition No.310 of 2011 Smt. Isha Sameer Dessai, alias Nima Khapru Fol Dessai, W/O late Sameer F. Dessai aged 36 years, housewife, R/O 437 B Shantanand Shantinagar, Aquem Baixo, Margao. …. Petitioner Vs. Dr. Fondu Shivram Dessai, aged 75 years, son of Shivram Dessai, (Expired) since deceased represented by its legal heirs, Plaintiff no.1. 1(a) Dr. Sandeep Dessai, major in age, son of late Fondu Dessai. 1(b) Dr. Meenakshi Sandeep Dessai, major in age, wife of Sandeep Dessai. 1(c) Mr. Amit Fondu Desai, major in age, son of late Fondu Dessai. 1 (d) Mrs. Ashwini Amit Dessai, major in age, wife of Amit Dessai. 2 All residing at 22 Sada Sunder, Shivaji Park (N), Mumbai 400028. 2. Smt. Sarladevi F. Dessai, W/o Dr. Fondo Shivram Dessai, both residing of 22, Sada Sunder, Keluskar Marg, Mumbai 400 028. … Respondents. Mr. G. Teles, Advocate for the Petitioner. Coram: A. P. Lavande, J. Date: 24th June, 2011. ORAL ORDER: Heard Mr. Teles, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is nothing but an abuse of process of law. The petitioner has challenged order dated 6/10/2010 passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, at Margao in Regular Civil Suit No.223/05/E by which the application filed by the petitioner/defendant for striking off the 3 paragraphs 19 A to 19 D of the plaint has been rejected. 3. Indisputably, paragraphs 19 A to 19 D were added by way of an amendment which was added pursuant to the amendment application filed by the respondents/plaintiffs which was contested by the defendant. By order dated 12/7/2010 the Trial Court allowed the amendment application. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application for striking off the very same paragraphs on the ground that they are irrelevant and false. 4. In my considered opinion, the petitioner herein could not have filed an application under Order 6 Rule 16 without challenging order granting amendment passed by the Trial Court. Hence, the application for striking off the said paragraphs was nothing but an abuse of process of law. Therefore, while dismissing the writ petition, I deem 4 it appropriate to impose exemplary costs on the petitioner quantified at Rs.2500/- (Rupees two thousand five hundred only) in favour of South Goa District Legal Services Authority. The petitioner shall deposit the costs in Trial Court within a period of four weeks. If the costs are not deposited, the Trial Court shall take appropriate steps to recover the same from the defendant/petitioner. 5. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. A. P. Lavande, J. Ap/-