1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.10590 OF 2009 Shekhar R. Hegde .. Petitioner versus Mohan Anand Shetty & Anr. .. Respondents Ms.Mamta a/w Mr.Ravi Goenka i/by Goenka Law Associates for the petitioner. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 14th January 2010. P.C: . Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The petitioner who is the original 2nd defendant has suffered a decree for possession in a suit filed by the 1st respondent. By a subsequent order passed in purported exercise of powers under section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the decree has been rectified by correcting the description of the suit property. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order by which the decree was permitted to be corrected is illegal. The learned counsel on instruction states that the petitioner is in the process of preferring an appeal against the amended decree. 2. It is obvious that in the appeal which the petitioner intends to prefer, the petitioner can always challenge the order under which the decree was ordered to be corrected. Hence, it is not necessary to entertain this writ petition. The petition 2 is rejected by keeping the remedy of the petitioner open. Ad-interim relief granted by this Court on 1st January 2008 will continue to operate for a period of eight weeks from today to enable the petitioner to prefer an appeal and to apply for appropriate relief in the appeal. 3. All contentions of the petitioner on merits are expressly kept open. (A.S.OKA,J)