:1: :1: :1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9309 OF 2007 Shri Mohhiddin Mohammed Mushrif ...Petitioner Versus Shri Chandrakant Ramchandra Patil ....Respondents G.N.Salunke Adv. for the petitioners. None for the respondents. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. 15th January, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : 1. There is no reason to interfere with the order allowing the amendment and more particularly to bring on record the events which have transpired after the suit has been instituted. The order does not suffer from any error apparent or perversity, inasmuch as, the :2: :2: :2: discretion has been exercised judiciously. The petitioner is not in any way prejudiced if the amended pleas are placed on record. The Proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 as amended in 2002, would not apply, inasmuch as, the events are stated to have occurred after the suit was instituted. There is no plea taken that the amendment was not permissible and the Proviso was applicable. In such circumstances, even on that ground, the order does not require any interference. Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. 2. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to file additional Written Statement which may be filed within a period of four weeks from today. **********