1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4730/2009 ( Dilip D. Anandani -: versus :- Hotel Balbir Inn Pvt. Ltd. ) WRIT PETITION NO. 4732/2009 ( Ramamurthy N. Reddy -: versus :- Hotel Balbir Inn Pvt. Ltd. ) WRIT PETITION NO. 4733/2009 ( Yogesh K. Hasoriya -: versus :- Hotel Balbir Inn Pvt. Ltd. ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : NOVEMBER 06, 2009. Heard Shri M. Shareef, learned counsel for petitioner and Shri A.G. Gharote, learned Counsel for respondent. The petitioners/tenants have challenged the judgment of eviction before the District Court in Regular Civil Appeal and in that appeal they wanted to raise a plea that in view of the documents on record, they became tenants of respondent in relation to structure also. The suit for eviction was filed by the respondent on the ground that it was lease of open land on which structure was raised by the tenants. The Lower Appellate Court has rejected that application for amendment. 2 The learned counsel for petitioners has argued that the amendment is essential so as to enable the petitioners to contend that they became tenant of structure. The learned counsel for respondent while refuting this argument of petitioner, has pointed out that all documents referred to in the amendment were already on record before the Small Causes Court. He states that such a plea was never raised before the trial Court, though it could have been raised in view of the documents available with them. He further argues that even on the strength of documents such a plea is not available. Learned counsel for petitioner in reply, stated that those sale deeds were not served on petitioners though it were placed on record. I find that the documents were already on record and necessary plea could have been raised by the petitioners before the Small Causes Court. The controversy is rightly appreciated by the Court below while rejecting the prayer for amendment. The plea has not been rightly allowed to be raised at belated stage. There is no jurisdictional error warranting interference in writ jurisdiction. Writ Petition is thus dismissed, with no order as to costs. JUDGE Rgd.