1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 185 OF 2010 (Suresh G. Raipurkar vs. Sharad R. Kedia & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. JANUARY 14, 2010. Heard Shri Lakhey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Deshpande, learned counsel for the respondents. This Court in LPA sent matter back to appellate Court to decide the controversy. When the LPA was decided or when learned Single Judge decided writ petition, the facts sought to be pleaded by amending written statement were not placed on record. This Court made the matter time bound and appellate Court has begun consideration. At this stage, application at Exh. 29 came to be filed alleging that some tenements have vacated and premises have become available to the respondent – landlord. The appellate Court has found that the effort to amend was aimed at frustrating the time bound disposal. In the circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter at this stage. However, the petitioner – tenant is at liberty to challenge the said order, if occasion therefor arises after final disposal of 2 Regular Civil Appeal No. 228 of 2008. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.