1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1880 OF 2009 Uttam Ram Chandra Pawar & Others ...Petitioners vs. Rangubai Shankar Pawar (deceased) ...Respondent Mr.P.J.Thorat i/b Mr.R.A.Thorat for the petitioners Mr.Prataprao J.Shinde for the respondent CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : AUGUST 6, 2009 P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners who are the Judgment Debtors. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the order by which the executing court permitted the respondent decree holder to amend the execution application for adding a prayer in execution application for issuing mandatory injunction. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the amendment of the execution application could not have been permitted and in any case, even going by the case made out by the decree holder, the relief sought to be claimed by the amendment cannot be granted. 2 By the impugned order, the decree holder was permitted to amend the execution application for claiming additional relief. Merely because the amendment is allowed that does not mean that the decree holder will be entitled to grant of the relief which was sought to be additionally claimed. It is obvious that the executing court is bound to consider the additional prayer incorporated by way of amendment in accordance with law 2 after considering the objections raised by the petitioners. 3 No case is made out for exercising any extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Writ Petition is rejected. However, as observed above, all contentions on merits are kept open. JUDGE