1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5086/2009 (SHAKSHAK SAHAKARI BANK LTD VS. SHRI PRAMOD P. TAREKAR AND OTHERS) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr.A.M.Ghare,, Adv. For petitioner. Mr.Rohit Joshi, Adv. For Respondent no.1. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : JANUARY 20, 2010. Heard Advocate Ghare, for the petitioner and Advocate Joshi for Respondent No.1. Respondents 2 to 6 are defendants in the suit and are not affected by adjudication. They are already served with the notice and they are not appearing. Advocate Ghare contends that in a suit filed under Section 13 of Secuteraization Act in the year 2003, amendment was sought in 2004 and thereafter, in 2009 only with a view to delay adjudication, according to him, amendment only raises a question of law which could have been argued without amendment. Advocate Joshi states that amendment has been found necessary by trial Court and has been allowed and hence this Court should not interfere. After hearing both the learned counsel, I find that petitioner is anxious to have disposal of civil suit in stipulated time. The trial Court has already allowed the amendment 2 which raises purely question of law and hence it is not proper on the part of this Court to interfere in writ jurisdiction in that order. However, proceedings in Special Civil Suit No. 759/2003 pending on the file of 7th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nagpur, are expedited and the said court is directed to decide the civil suit as early as possible and in any case by 31st August, 2010. With these directions, writ petition is disposed of. No orders as to costs. JUDGE Rvjalit.