SCA/20059/2005 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 20059 of 2005 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ =================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? =================================== PRAGJIBHAI KHODABHAI - Petitioner Versus MAGANLAL KHODABHAI - Respondent =================================== Appearance : MR DEEPAK M SHAH for Petitioner. MR SANDEEP N BHATT for Respondent. =================================== CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ SCA/20059/2005 2/3 JUDGMENT Date : 21/11/2006 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner has originally filed Civil Revision Application No. 88 of 2000 challenging the order dated 06.01.2000 passed by the learned 4th Joint Civil Judge (S.D.), Rajkot below an application Exh. 57 in Civil Suit No. 780 of 1984 whereby the application seeking amendment in the written statement filed by the defendant was rejected. The said Civil Revision Application was converted into Special Civil Application by an order passed by this Court on 28.09.2005. 2. Heard Mr. Deepak M. Shah, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Sandeep N. Bhatt, learned advocate appearing for the respondent. 3. After having heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and after having gone through the impugned order and having considered their SCA/20059/2005 3/3 JUDGMENT submissions, the Court is of the view that in view of the fact that Court's power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is very limited in entertaining the petition, the Court does not see any justification to entertain this petition and to interfere in the impugned order passed by the Learned Trial Judge. 4. The petition is accordingly dismissed. Rule discharged without any order as to costs. [K.A. PUJ, J.] Savariya