1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 1481 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. WRIT PETITION NO.: 1481 OF 2011 *** 1. This Court has issued notice for final disposal on 28th February, 2011 and stayed further proceedings in Special Civil Suit No. 50 of 2009 after noticing that application for amendment was moved by petitioner/ plaintiff even before framing of issues. Though Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are served, there is no appearance for them. Respondent No.3 is a formal party in his capacity as officer of Court who executed sale deed. 2. Shri Ghatol Patil points out that in the plaint as filed on 17th June, 2009 while narrating facts in paragraph 8 onwards of the plaint, reference to contention of defendant that he has obtained decree in Regular Civil Suit No.180 of 1976 and in execution thereof a sale deed in his favour already appear. After filing of suit, the petitioner/ 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 1481 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. plaintiff could collect more information and hence on 29th September, 2010 filed application for amendment of plaint to point out that decree in favour of defendants was self operating and time bound. Amount, as ordered thereby, was not deposited within stipulated time and hence no title could have been conferred upon them. He has invited attention to the certified copy of order sheet to show that issues have been framed on 11th January, 2011. According to him, in this situation, rejection of application for amendment by impugned order is misconceived as the nature of suit does not undergo any change. 3. Perusal of impugned order shows only reason put forth is knowledge to plaintiff about Regular Civil Suit No.180 of 1976 and execution proceedings in pursuance thereof. The Court has found amendment application belated and also observed that it would 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 1481 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. change nature of suit. 4. In view of the facts noticed above, both reasons are unsustainable. There is no unreasonable delay and also nature of suit does not undergo change. Impugned order dated 4th January, 2011 is quashed and set aside. Application Exhibit-37 is allowed. Necessary amendment be carried out by 8th June, 2011. Liberty to defendants to carry out consequential amendment thereafter. Rule made absolute accordingly. No costs. [B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] Dated:20/04/2011. ans/1481