1 W.P.No.9758/11 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.9758 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders Mr.S.U.Choudhari, advocate for the petitioner. CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 20.12.2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. The present petitioner is the original defendant No.1. The Respondent/plaintiff has filed a suit for injunction. During the pendency of the suit, the defendant No.2 sold the property. The plaintiff filed an application for adding the purchaser as the defendant No.3 and also consequential amendment in the plaint. The said application is allowed. The defendant No.1 has assailed the said order in the present Writ Petition. 3. Mr.Choudhari, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the trial has commenced, the amendment could not have been allowed. The amendment in the plaint has also been allowed. The Court has not taken into consideration the proviso to Order 6 2 W.P.No.9758/11 Rule 17 of the C.P.C. 4. The defendant No.2 has sold the property to defendant No.3 during the pendency of the suit. In view of Order 22 Rule 10 of the C.P.C. substitution is permissible. In place of defendant No.2, the defendant No.3 has been added as party. The consequential amendment also would be necessary in the plaint. 5. In light of the above, no error is committed by the trial Court in passing the impugned order. 6. The Writ Petition is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) Dt.20.12.2011. asp/office/wp9758.11 3 W.P.No.9758/11