1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8145 OF 2008 Baban Dagdu Darekar .. Petitioner Versus Babu Dagdu Darekar (deceased) Smt.Ambubai Babu Darekar & Ors. .. Respondenets Mr.P.J.Pawar for petitioner Mr.S.V.Sadavarte for respondents. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 26th June 2009. P.C.: 1] This order is passed during the course of pendency of the civil appeal filed by the respondent. Respondent questioned the decree passed in favour of the petitioner and during the pendency of the appeal, applied for amendment of his written statement filed in the Trial Court. That application having been allowed, the petitioner plaintiff apprehends that the lower Appellate Court may proceed to dismiss the suit and, therefore, has filed this petition challenging the order of the Lower Appellate Court, copy of which is at page 16 of the petition. 2] The apprehension expressed by Mr.Pawar for petitioner is that not 1 only the amendments to written statement are allowed but when the petitioner applied for amendment to the plaint, that application was disallowed by the lower Appellate Court and, therefore, his apprehension has some force. 3] I do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned order and that too at the stage at which the main matter is pending, on the strength of such apprehensions alone. The Appellate Court has yet to decide the matter finally. Parties are yet to argue their respective cases. It is not as if the lower appellate court has allowed the appeal and the petitioner is remedyless. If finally the order passed is adverse to the petittioner, he can always raise appropriate pleas with regard to the approach adopted by the Lower Appellate Court and all such pleas including the contentions raised in the petition, are open for being raised at that stage. With this clarification, present petition is dismissed as the order under challenge is interlocutory. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)