1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 431 OF 2006. Salgaocar Mining Industries Limited, a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered Office at Salgaocar Chambers, P.O. Box 114, Margao­Goa. .... Petitioner. Versus 1. Shri Roghuvir Rajaram Paingankar, son of late Rajaram Rangaji Paingankar, aged about 69 years, Mine Owner, residing at House No. 442, Near Cine Vishant, Margao, Goa (since deceased) by legal representatives:­ 1a) Shri Rohit Roghuvir Paingankar (b) Smt. Nutan Rohit Paingankar © Shri Rajendra alias Rajesh Raghuvir Paingankar, major and his wife, (d)Smt. Perathibha Rajendra Paingankar, major. All residing at No. 442, Opposite Peerless Office, Cine Vishant Road, Aquem Alto, Margao, Goa. (e) Smt. Radha Nandalal Kairo, major, and her husband, (f) Shri Nandalal Kairo Both residing at 3rd Floor, Govardhan Apartments, Aquem Alto, Margao, Goa. 2 (g) Smt. Sujata Sharad Korgaonkar, major, and her husband: (h) Shri Sharad T. Korgaonkar. Both residing at Mumbai. (i)Smt. Savita B. Gianni, major, and her husband: (j) Shri Bhisham B. Gianni, major, both residing at Margao, Goa. (k) Smt. Shakuntala R. Paingankar, residing at House No.442, Near Cine Vishant, Margao, Goa. 2. V.M. Salgaoncar & Brothers Limited, a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered Office at Salgaocar Building, Vasco­da­Gama, Goa. .... Respondents. Mr. M. S. Sonak, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. V. Menezes, Advocate for Respondents No.1(a) to 1(d). Mr. C. Mascarenhas, Advocate for Respondents No.1(e) to 1(k). CORAM: DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. DATE: 18 th OCTOBER, 2006. ORAL JUDGMENT: Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondents. 3 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent taken up for hearing. 3. The learned counsel for the respondent consent that the amendment application which was moved by the plaintiff be allowed. However, I make it clear that all the contentions and allegations with regard to the said amendment should be kept open so as to enable them to agitate them at the final hearing of the above suit. Hence it is made clear that the amendment application filed by the petitioner which was not granted by the trial Court by Order dated 11th September, 2006 is set aside and the amendment sought by the plaintiff/petitioner is granted. Amendment to be carried out within two weeks from today. It is also made clear that all objections raised by the respondents in this behalf are kept expressly open so as to enable them to agitate the same at the stage of final hearing of the suit. As agreed the plaintiff shall also not lead any further evidence in the suit. Having regard to the fact that the above suit is of the year 1991, the Civil Judge Senior Division, Vasco­da­Gama is directed to dispose of Special Civil Suit No.8/91/A as expeditiously as possible and in any event on or before 31st December, 2006. 4 Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Parties to act on authenticated copy. DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. sl.