1 mp t IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4968 of 2008 Rameshchandra R. Bheda .. Petitioner versus Vasant Lalji Shah .. Respondent ... Mr.P.S.Dani i/b Kiran Jain & Co. for the petitioner. ir.G.V. Mhatre for respondent. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J DATED : 27th August 2008 P.C.: 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The fact that amendment has been granted in terms of the averments in the schedule does not mean that the plaintiff has succeeded in getting that relief without establishing the relevant facts so as to become entitled for that relief. Thus, understood, no interference with the discretionary 2 order passed by the court below is warranted. 3. The question regarding the correctness of the claim of the plaintiff in terms of the amendment shall be considered at the appropriate stage by the trial court keeping in mind all relevant facts placed on record by the respective parties. 4. The next grievance of the petitioner is that the amendment as granted will permit the plaintiff to get relief to the extent of Rs.60 lakhs, and yet no direction has been issued by the trial court to call upon the plaintiff to deposit additional court fee. Whether the plaintiff is required to pay additional court fee in view of the claim set up in the amended clauses will have to be considered by the trial court at the appropriate stage. 5. Petitioner will be free to file additional written statement to deal with the amended averments in the plaint. That be filed within two weeks from the date of amended copy of the plaint served on the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the above observations. 3 (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)