1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10018 OF 2009 Madhukar Baburao Chaudhary & ors........ Petitioner versus Dattatraya Kondiba Thakur & anr ........Respondent. Mr. Nitin Mulye h/f. G.S. Godbole adv. for the Petitioner None for the Respondent. CORAM: A. P DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 16th December, 2009. P. C.: 1. The plaintiff instituted a suit for declaration and permanent injunction seeking to restrain the respondent from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff in respect of the suit flat. At a later point of time the plaintiff/respondent filed an amendment application with a view to bring on record the fact that during pendency of the suit he has been dispossessed. The proposed amendment also seeks to include a prayer for possession. The trial court has allowed the application to the extent it relates to claiming relief of possession on the basis of allegation of forcible dispossession during pendency of the suit. The trial court has observed that the plaintiff has claimed in the plaint that he is 2 in possession of the property as owner thereof and thus the amendment which proposes to claim possession on the basis of forcible dispossession during pendency of the suit, the trial court has allowed the application and the other proposed amendment has been rejected. Aggrieved by that part of the order, which allowed the amendment application touching the inclusion of prayer for possession is challenged by original defendant no.2 by filing this writ petition. 2. Perused the order, The same does not suffer from any illegality. In the result, there being no merit in the petition, the same is dismissed. (A. P. Deshpande, J.)