1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.5461 of 2009 (Mr. Sheshrao Z. Dhawade v. State of Maharashtra and others) Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's order Shri S.N. Mudliar, Advocate for Petitioner. Coram : B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. Dated : 16th December, 2009 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. By the impugned order, the learned 8th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur, has rejected the petitioner-plaintiff’s application under Order 6, Rule 17 of the CPC after noticing that by amendment, the facts within knowledge since six years were sought to be brought on record, there was no explanation for such delay and that the trial had already commenced. The learned counsel for the petitioner has attempted to show that inference of facts being within knowledge is drawn from Regular Civil Suit No.722 of 2003, but that suit has been decreed on 30-4-2009 and because of that decree, the amendment was sought for. It is apparent that the decree as such is not relevant and the amendment sought is on facts. I, therefore, do not find that there is jurisdictional error or perversity in the impugned order warranting interference in writ jurisdiction. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the said order before the 2 appropriate forum after the suit is finally decided, if occasion therefor arises. Judge. pdl