1 WP No.3824/11 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3824 of 2011 Pandurang Bhau Malve deceased thru LRs Sulabai Pandurang Malve and ors. ... Petitioners versus Baban Namdeo Malve ... Respondent ... Mr. Dilip Bodake for the petitioner. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 22nd June 2011 P.C. 1. Heard. 2. Petitioners are legal representatives of Pandurang Bhau Malve, the original defendant no.1. On the death of defendant no. 1, petitioner made an application for substituting his name by legal representatives. The application was allowed and the amendment has been carried out. Petitioner challenges the action of the original plaintiff in carrying out the amendment after two weeks of passing of the order allowing the substitution. Counsel submits that no period was fixed by the court for carrying out the amendment. As such, in view of the provisions of Order 6 Rule 18 of the Code of 2 WP No.3824/11 Civil Procedure (for short “the Code”), the amendment ought to have been carried out within two weeks. Order 6 Rule 18 applies in respect of amendments allowed under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code. Substitution of the heirs of a deceased – defendant allowed under Rule 5 of Order 22 of the Code. No period is prescribed for physically carrying out the substitution. Order 6 Rule 18 of the Code has no application for physically carrying out the substitution. No other point was urged. Writ Petition is rejected summarily. (D.G.KARNIK, J)