1 W.P.No.2934.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WIRT PETITION NO. 2934 OF 2010 Rajendrakumar Laxmiprasad Shukla ... PETITIONER V E R S U S Sudarshan Jaswantkumar Shukla and others ... RESPONDENTS ... Mr.K.K.Kulkarni,Advocate for Petitioner. Mr.S.J.Salunke,Advocate for respondent No.7. ... CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 28TH APRIL, 2010 PER COURT 1] Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2] The petitioner is aggrieved due to dismissal of the amendment application by the trial Court. He filed application (Exh.192/D) to add prayer clause so as to seek cancellation of the sale deed in question. In fact, such prayer is not at all required to be made by the petitioner (Plaintiff), and therefore, the amendment would be unnecessary. 3] Perusal of the averments in the plaint go to 2 W.P.No.2934.10 show that the petitioner has already pleaded that sale deed is void abinitio and his share could have been alienated by the defendant No.2. He also alleged that the sale deed in question was brought out by defendant Nos. 2, 7 and 8 in collusion with each other. He prayed for relief of declaration of his ownership and possession. His rights are not affected due to rejection of the amendment application. 4] Hence, Writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- ( V.R.KINGAONKAR ) JUDGE MTK/ 3 W.P.No.2934.10