: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION WRIT PETITION WRIT PETITION NO.4643 OF 2005 NO.4643 OF 2005 NO.4643 OF 2005 Mr.Vijay Rai ... Petitioner V/s. Rallis India Limited ... Respondent Mr.B.P. Saraf i/b Ajay Panicker for Petitioner Mr.G.K. Vora for Respondent No.1 CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: AUGUST 16, 2005 AUGUST 16, 2005 AUGUST 16, 2005 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . This Petition has been filed challenging the order of the trial Court disallowing the amendments to the written statement. According to the Petitioner, the amendments ought to have been allowed since he will be prejudiced in any future proceedings which he may take against the original landlord R.J. Sethna. The Petitioner in the written statement to the suit filed by the Respondent has admitted that he was inducted in the suit premises since he was the managing director of the company and in service. He has retired from the company and the company has claimed back the suit premises by filing L.E. & c. Suit NO.271/286 of 2001. The trial Court has found that the proposed amendments are not required for the effective disposal of the suit between : 2 : himself and the respondent which is based on a leave and licence agreement. I see no reason to interfere with the impugned order. The judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Pankaja & Anr. v/s. Yellappa & Ors., (2004) 6 SCC 415 (2004) 6 SCC 415 (2004) 6 SCC 415 relied on behalf of the Petitioner also is not of no avail. The proposed amendments are neither necessary nor do they subserve the ends of justice. Petition rejected.