1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7197 OF 2009 Bhogilal Virchand Shaha .. Petitioner versus Unus Isa Attar & Anr. .. Respondents Mr.V.M.Mali for the petitioner. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 11th September 2009. P.C.: . The petitioner is the original defendant-tenant. The respondents are the landlords. In a suit for eviction filed by the respondents on the ground of bonafide and personal requirement, this Court has passed an order of remand directing the trial Court to consider the question of comparative hardship and especially whether no hardship would be caused to either of the parties by passing a partial decree for possession. A decree was passed in the said suit in the year 1987 which was confirmed in appeal in the year 1992. The order of remand was passed by this Court on 27th August 2004. After remand, the respondents applied for amendment of the plaint. The suit is of the year 1976. 2. By the proposed amendment, the respondents intended to bring on record the events which have transpired after 1993. It is sought to be 2 pointed out that number of family members have increased and the need of the respondents has increased. By the impugned order, the said amendment has been allowed. 3. The said amendment is certainly relevant for deciding the suit in terms of the order of remand passed by this Court. What is sought to be brought on record are subsequent events. Therefore, no fault can be found with the impugned order permitting the amendment. The petitioner can always file additional written statement dealing with the amended plaint. The petition is rejected. If additional written statement is not filed till today, the petitioner will be entitled to do so within a period of eight weeks from today. All contentions of the parties are kept open. (A.S.OKA,J)