1 pps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATEJURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6700 OF 2011 Namdeo Amruta Mhaske since deceased through L.Rs. ...Petitioners Versus Smt. Shantabai Kisan Mhaske & Others ...Respondents Mr.Drupad Patil for the Petitioners CORAM:- R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED:- 7th SEPTEMBER, 2011. P.C. 1. In Civil Appeal No. 510 of 2011, by judgment and order dated 8th September, 2010, the learned District Judge, Pune, by judgment and Order dated 8th September, 2010 remanded the matter and granted liberty to the respondents to file an application for amendment, if required. On remand, the respondents filed an application for amendment below Exhibit 25. That application filed in Regular Civil Suit No.1253 of 1988 was heard and the learned 6th Joint Civil Judge, 2 Junior Division, Pune (hereinafter referred to as the learned trial Judge) decided the same by order dated 24th June, 2011. The said application below Exhibit 125 was granted. This Order dated 24th June, 2011 is challenged in this petition. 2. I have heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner. He took me through the text of the amendment application and submitted that the respondents were permitted to carry out the consequential amendments. Based on the decision given by the learned District Judge, according to him, on account of the amendment application at Exhibit 125 a new case is introduced and that is not permissible. Learned Advocate for the petitioner made strenuous efforts to show to the Court that an altogether new case is introduced. After having gone through the record as well as the impugned order, I am inclined to observe that the respondent has not given up her earlier stand. By virtue of the amendment, some more facts in regard to certain properties are sought to be brought on record on the basis of the information received by the respondent during the pendency of the trial. In my view, the learned Trial Judge has considered the relevant aspect and has granted the amendment. 3 The amendment granted by itself does not cause prejudice to the present petitioner. It will be open for the petitioner to file additional written statement and contest the suit on merits. All questions in that behalf are required to be kept open. In my view, the petition need not be entertained. Hence the petition is dismissed at the stage of admission with no order as to costs. (R.Y.GANOO, J.)