1 wp1518.11 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1518 OF 2011 _____________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | appearances, Court's | Court’s or Judge’s orders orders or | directions and | Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________________ Mr. S.B. Yawalkar, advocate for the petitioner. 1. Heard Advocate Mr. Yawalkar for petitioner- defendant. Defendant is tenant who has filed Regular Civil Appeal no. 271 of 2003. In that appeal, he on 26.07.2010 moved application seeking leave to produce notice dated 14.09.1994 forwarded by the mother of present respondent. By order dated 17.08.2010 that application was rejected. One of the reason is there was no pleading about such notice. The petitioner then filed application seeking leave to amend written statement to incorporate pleading about that notice. On 05.10.2010, that application has been rejected. Both these orders are questioned before this Court. 2. Learned Counsel for petitioner contends that according to respondent, the petitioner is tenant as also 2 wp1518.11 tress-passer. He further submits that in view of this peculiar plea notice dated 14.09.1994 is very important. He invited my attention to the fact that the suit was filed in the year 1997 and the appellate Court has not realised that unamended provisions of Order 6 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code were applicable. 3. With the assistance of learned Counsel, I have perused both the orders. Even though it is presumed that the notice dated 14.09.1994 was discovered during pendency of appeal, its issuance and receipt could have been pleaded in written statement. Appellate Court has found that such pleading was being made almost after a period of seven years with a view to delay the proceedings. 4. All relevant aspects are looked into and I therefore, do not find any jurisdictional error or perversity. With liberty to petitioner to challenge the impugned orders after appeal is finally decided, the present Petition is disposed of. No costs. (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE. 14.03.2011 gas/wp1518.11