(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 7184 OF 2009 1. Kashinath s/o. Nagurao Jadhav, 2. Smt. Shevanta w/o. Nagurao Jadhav, 3. Muktabai w/o. Narsingh Kadam, .. Petitioners 4. Tejpbai d/o. Nagurao Jadhav, (Original 5. Rukminibai w/o. Suresh Bhojgude. defendants) versus Bhagurao s/o. Vishwanat Jadhav. .. Respondent (Original plaintiff) .......................... Mr. S.S. Choudhari, Advocate, for the petitioners. .......................... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : 5TH NOVEMBER 2009. COURT'S ORDER : 1. By way of present petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 24th September 2009, passed by the learned 3rd Joint (2) Civil Judge (Junior Division), Osmanabad, below Exhibit 52 in Regular Civil Suit No. 166/2004, thereby allowing the application for amendment of the plaint, filed by the respondent plaintiff. 2. Mr. S.S. Choudhari, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, submits that the suit is of the year 2004 and no reasons have been by the plaintiff, as to why the property sought to be included by way of amendment, could not be included while filing the plaint. 3. Admittedly, evidence is yet to commence in the matter. The issues in the suit are framed. It would thus be clear that the trial is yet to commence. In that view of the matter, no error could be found with the approach adopted by the learned trial Judge so as to warrant interference in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 4. Petition is, therefore, rejected. ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp7184