1207wp3245.11.odt 1 THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.3245 OF 2011. Shri Amit S.Pashine ..vs.. Smt.Mangala Vasant Mukewar ............................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ............................................................................................................................................................... Mr.S.G.Hindaria, Adv. for the petitioner. Mr.Masood Shareef, Adv. for the resp. CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATED : 12th July, 2011. The above petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order dated 6/6/2011, by which the application filed by the petitioner to amend the memo of Appeal, so as to incorporate a ground of challenge on the point of the jurisdiction of the Small Causes Court, came to be rejected. The petitioner herein has already suffered a decree in Reg.Cvil Suit No.330 of 2009, which has been filed by the respondent herein on the ground of bona fide and reasonable requirement. In the said suit, it was the specific stand of the petitioner herein that he is a tenant in respect of premises in question. The said suit, as indicated earlier, was decreed on the ground that the respondent/plaintiff has proved the bona fide need. Aggrieved by the decreeing of the said suit, the petitioner filed Reg.Civil Appeal No.490 of 2010. Significantly in the grounds of appeal the findings recorded by the Trial Court as 1207wp3245.11.odt 2 regards the bona fide requirement were assailed and there was not a whisper as regards the jurisdiction of the Small Causes Court, and rightly so because it was the case of the petitioner right from the inception that he is the tenant in respect of the premises in question. Now, a turn around is sought to be made by the petitioner so as to incorporate the ground to the effect that Small Cause Court has no jurisdiction by amending the memo of Appeal. The application filed by the petitioner came to be rejected by the impugned order dated 6/6/2011. In the conspectus of the facts as narrated above, the order passed by the First Appellate Court cannot be faulted with. No case for interference is made out. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. JUDGE chute