1 WP 4101/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4101/2011 1 Haribhau s/o Balaji Nagargoje, Age : 61 years, Occu. Agril., R/o Sawargaon, Tq. Gevrai, Dist. Beed. 2 Sou Gayabai w/o Haribhau Nagargoje, Age : 51 years, Occu. Agril., R/o Sawargaon, Tq. Gevrai, Dist. Beed. 3 Keshav s/o Haribhau Nagargoje, Age : 33 years, Occu. Agril., R/o Sawargaon, Tq. Gevrai, Dist. Beed. 4 Kiran s/o Haribhau Naargoje, Age : 31 years, Occu. Agril., R/o Sawargaon, Tq. Gevrai, Dist. Beed. ...Petitioners. Versus 1 Narhari s/o Baburao Sanap, Age : 75 years, Occu. Agril., R/o Sawargaon, Now at Gadhi, Tq. Geverai Dist. Beed. ...Respondent. Mr. Nilkanth P. Bangar, Advocate for the petitioners. CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 11th August, 2011. PER COURT: 1. Heard. 2. This writ petition challenges the order dated 19/04/2011 allowing amendment in the plaint. The respondent / plaintiff contends now that due to this amedment, new cause of action is included in the plaint. Besides, he said, the suit is now not maintainable. The facts leading to this litigation in short can be narrated as under. 2. The respondent / plaintiff filed this suit in respect of a plot of 2 WP 4101/2011 land. He asserted that he is owner and possessor of the same and that the petitioners / defendants were trying to disturb his possession. He even obtained an order of temporary injunction pending disposal of the suit. During the pendency of the suit, the respondent / plaintiff sold this plot by registered deed to a third party whose name is dislosed. The respondent / plaintiff now says that he would continue with the suit and would continue to seek protection of the suit property. He says that when he sold the suit plot to the third party, he agreed to continue with this suit and continue its prosecution. Accordingly, he made the present application in which he sought amndment to the plaint. In the plaint, he has mentioned all the above mentioned facts which occurred after filing of the suit. I am not inclined to discuss as to what would happen to the maintainability of the suit if the respondent / plaintiff himself admitted that he had sold away the property but it is enough to say that situation of this nature would give an opportunity to the petitioners / defenants to amend his written statement to to take up a new defence so. There is certinly no change in the nature of the suit. In fact, no prejudice is likely to be caused to the petitioners / defenants if the amendment is allowed. ORDER The petition stands dismissed with direction to the Court below that the learned judge should make endeavour to dispose of this old suit of year 2000 as early as possible. [A.V. NIRGUDE,J.] ts k/2011/August11/wp4101.11