1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.242/2011 IN WRIT PETITION No. 699/2011. Mr. Rameshwar Keshao Ubale -VERSUS- Sushma Rameshwar Ubale. _______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. ______________________________________________________________________________ CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & P.D. KODE, JJ. DATED : 15.06.2011. Heard Shri Sudame, the learned Counsel for the appellant-husband. Application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking divorce, filed by appellant – husband was rejected by the trial Court, and in Regular Civil Appeal No.151/2007 filed by him, an application under Order VI Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code was moved after about three years, contending that the respondent – wife was suffering from some skin disease and that skin disease was suppressed while marrying her, with the appellant. The amendment was allowed by the learned District Judge, Buldhana on 2 10.12.2010. That order was challenged by respondent – wife in Writ Petition No.699/2011 and the learned Single Judge of this Court found that by allowing such amendment, a disputed question of fact was allowed to be raised which necessitated fresh trial. It was also noted that such amendment changed the nature of proceedings and caused grave and serious prejudice to the respondent – wife. The learned Single Judge has also found that the adjudication of that amendment was not necessary for effectively deciding the controversy involved in the appeal. During hearing, we have attempted to find out why such a plea available at the time of filing of the petition for divorce in 2003 was not raised. There is no satisfactory explanation for the same. As we do not see any jurisdictional error or perversity, Letters Patent Appeal is not entertained and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. JUDGE JUDGE Rgd