1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7851 OF 2008 Mrs.Kanta Bhalchandra Chachad & Ors. ...Petitioners vs. Tribhuvan Sheshnath Sashthe & Anr. ...Respondents Mr.S.A.Bhagwat i/b Ms Kalyani Shinde for the petitioners Mr.D.B.Sawant for respondent nos.1 and 2 CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : AUGUST 28, 2009 P.C. 1 By earlier order, the writ petition was directed to be disposed of finally at the stage of admission. 2 The petitioners are the defendants and the respondents are the original plaintiffs. The respondents-plaintiffs filed a suit against the petitioners for possession essentially on the ground of bonafide and reasonable requirement. An application was made by the petitioners seeking permission to amend the written statement. It was contended in the application that the petitioners have learnt that there is a room available in the same building in which the suit premises are situated and the said room is lying vacant. It is stated that the room in question in possession of the plaintiffs. The contention is that the availability of the said room affects the alleged bonafide requirement of the respondents-plaintiffs and for the purpose of proving 2 the said fact, the amendment of written statement was necessary. 3 By the impugned order, the prayer made by the petitioner has been rejected. One of the observations made while rejecting the prayer is that the petitioners can always lead evidence on this aspect. 4 The learned counsel for the respondent on instructions states that it will be always open for the petitioners to cross examine the witnesses of the respondents on the said ground of the alleged availability of the one room on the ground floor of the said building to the respondents. It will be open for the petitioners to adduce evidence in that behalf. He states that the respondents will not raise any objection to the petitioners cross examining the witnesses on the said aspect and to the petitioners leading evidence on the said aspect though there is no specific plea raised in the written statement. The statements made by the learned counsel for the respondent are accepted. In view of the statements, it will be open for the petitioners to establish that the said room is available to the respondents. Hence, it is not necessary to interfere with the impugned order. 4 Hence, I pass the following order : 3 i)The statements made by the learned counsel for the respondents are accepted. In view of the statements, the petition is disposed of. ii)All contentions of the parties on merits of the suit are expressly kept open. 4 5 JUDGE