1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE Civil Application No.2212 of 2009 IN Writ Petition No.539 of 2005 Makhija Developers Pvt. Ltd. .. .. Applicant v/s. 1.City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Limited (CIDCO) & ors. .. .. Respondents Mr.S.G. Aney, Senior Advocate with Mr.Sachin Shetye i/by Mr.Avinash Fatangare for the Applicant. Mr.A.A. Kumbhakoni with Mr.A.M. Kulkarni for Res.No.1. Mr.S.D. Rayrikar, AGP for Res.No.2. Mr.Pritesh Ragga with Mr.Sumit Raghani i/by M/s.PDS Legal for Res.No.3. Mr.V.A. Thorat, Senior Advocate with Mr.Vaibhav Sughdare and Ms.Deepti Mistry i/by M/s.Vaibhav Mehta & Associates for Res.No.4. ----- CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE & SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, JJ. Dated : 24th September, 2009 P.C. : 1.Heard Mr.Aney, the learned Senior Counsel with Mr.Sachin Shetye for the Applicant-Company. 2.This Application prays for leave to amend Writ Petition No.539 of 2005. 2 3.Respondent No.4 has filed an Affidavit-in-reply and opposed this Application. We have heard Mr.Thorat, the learned Senior Counsel for Respondent No.4 and Mr.Kumbhakoni, the learned Counsel for Respondent No.1- CIDCO. We have perused the Schedule of the proposed amendment and we are satisfied that leave to amend is required to be granted. 4.Hence, the Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). 5.Amended Petition memo be substituted by tomorrow and copy of the same shall be served on all the Respondents. 6.Additional Affidavit-in-reply / return to be filed before the next date. 7.Let the Petition be listed for final hearing on 1 st of October 2009. [SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J.] [B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.]