mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4195 of 2008 Ida Mathias & ors. .. Petitioners versus Liguory John D’Suza & Anr. .. Respondents ... Mr.Shailesh Thakkar for the petitioners. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J DATED : 22nd July 2008 P.C.: 1. Heard counsel for the petitioner. 2. I find no reason to depart from the opinion expressed by the court below as can be discerned from the concluding paragraph of the impugned judgement which takes note of the fact that the suit was filed in the year 1977 by the father of the petitioner who incidentally expired in the year 2000 and till such time never thought it necessary to amend the plaint in terms of the proposed amendment sought by the petitioner. Moreover, the court below has found that the proposed amendment is not in relation to any subsequent events but events which could be referred to in earlier point of time in the suit itself which has not been done by the petitioners father. Suffice it to observe that no interference with the discretionary order of the court below is warranted in exercise of writ jurisdiction. 3. The argument of the petitioner that the amendment was necessitated in view of the observations made by the court below in its order dated 20th July 2007 does not take the matter any further. Those observations cannot be the basis to undo the reasons recorded by the court below in the impugned judgement which are cogent reasons for declining the request of amendment as sought by the petitioner. 4. However, it is made clear that it will be open to the petitioner to raise appropriate grounds before the appellate court if and when occasion arises after final judgement is pronounced against the petitioner. 4. Hence, no interference is warranted. Writ Petition is dismissed. (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)