1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. WRIT PETITION NO.: 665 0F 2010 *** Limbabai W/o Ashok Mangule and others Versus Lochanbai Bapurao Patil (Died) and others *** 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner. 2. Indisputably, present petitioner/ plaintiff had filed Regular Civil Suit No.325 of 2003. It is not in dispute that the suit was heard and dismissed by the trial Court. Plaintiff/ petitioner filed Regular Civil Appeal No.28 of 2008 in the Court of learned District Judge under section 96, read with Order 41. That appeal is pending. During the pendency of that appeal, application seeking amendment Exhibit-18 is filed by the present Petitioner/ plaintiff. Annexure-F is the copy of the application. This application has been rejected by the first Appellate Court. From the record, it appears that the said order is not challenged. Thereafter, this application, seeking amendment is filed. Suit is of the year 2003, after amendment to order 6 Rule 17 of the C.P.Code, which has come into force from 1st July, 2002. No reason or ground is mentioned in the application pertaining to 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. expression "due diligence". In my view, no case for invocation of extraordinary jurisdiction is established. Petition stands dismissed in limine with no order as to costs. [S.B.DESHMUKH, J.] Dated:18/02/2010. ans/665