1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5350 OF 2009 (Shri Navnath Kisanji Gajbhiye vs. Shri Gangadhar Bhagwan Gedam) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DECEMBER 10, 2009. Shri Motghare, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the proposed amendment is necessary to place correct facts on record to assist the trial Court in finding out truth. I have perused the impugned order and I find that the suit has proceeded. The plaintiff has examined himself and three witnesses and closed his side. Thereafter defendant examined himself and when case was posted for further evidence of defendant No.1, the application for amendment seeking to place on record genealogical tree and some events before revenue authorities was moved. The Court has found that before recording of evidence, the plaintiff had amended his plaint and subsequent developments were brought on record. The parties thereafter carried out consequential amendments and there was no justification as to why these aspects could not be placed on record earlier. I do not find any jurisdictional error warranting interference in writ jurisdiction. Writ 2 Petition is, therefore, dismissed with liberty to the petitioner – defendant to challenge impugned order after final adjudication in suit, if occasion therefor arises. JUDGE *GS.