1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4177 OF 2009 Ashok s/o. Uttmrao Adwant .. petitioners Versus Mukund s/o. Uttamrao Adwant and others. .. Respondent. --- Mr. K.M. Nagarkar, Advocate for the petitioners CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : 14th July, 2009. ORAL ORDER :- 1] By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 9th January, 2009 vide which the application filed by the present petitioner for amendment of the plaint came to be rejected. 2] The petitioner has filed a suit for declaration, ownership and possession of the suit property. After the issues were framed and the evidence commenced, an application came to be filed for amendment of the 2 plaint for bringing on record the matter regarding partition executed on 16/6/1984. The said application is rejected. Hence, the present petition. 3] Shri Nagarkar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the trial court held that the proposed amendment would not change the nature of the suit, the application is rejected on technical grounds. 4] Perusal of the impugned order reveals that the learned trial court has rejected the application only in view of the proviso to order 6 Rule 17 of the C.P.C. The trial court has found that the factor regarding partition dated 16/6/1984 was very much within the knowledge of the petitioner at the stage of drafting of the plaint. It has been further found that the petitioner/plaintiff is an Advocate and had he exercised due diligence, he could have very well brought the matter on record which is now sought to be brought on record by way of amendment. In that view of the matter, no perversity could be found with the approach adopted so as to warrant interference. Hence, the writ petition is rejected. [B.R. GAVAI,J.] Grt/- 3