-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.970 of 2008 1. Shri Dhanpal Appu Magdum and others ..Petitioners vs. 1. Shri Nabhiraj Dada Magdum and others ..Respondents Shri T.S.Ingale for petitioners. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. 13th February, 2008 13th February, 2008 13th February, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard Shri Ingale for the petitioners. Perused the impugned order. 2. All that is permitted by the Trial Court is amendment to the plaint. Amendment is permitted to the extent that the claim on the basis of title and ownership is now omitted from the consideration and relief claimed would be considered only on the basis of easementary right of the plaintiff. The amendment has been allowed only in part. It is not as if the petitioners cannot resist even the amended pleas. It would be open for the plaintiffs/petitioners to file additional written statement so also clarify that not only -2- the original plaintiffs do not have any easementary rights but having given up their ownership rights the suit claim must be rejected as a whole. That apart, they can resist the claim on the basis of easementary right by pointing out that material facts and particualrs as regards such rights are lacking and no relief can be granted on the basis of even amended pleas. Further the claim can be resisted on the ground of limitation as well. Keeping all these pleas open to be urged the present petition is dismissed. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.)