(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 6605 OF 2009 Malhari s/o. Babu Bade. .. Petitioners (Original defendant nos.1 and 2) versus Bhagirathibai w/o. Babu Bade & others. .. Respondents (Nos.1 to 3 - Original plaintiffs) (Nos.4 to 8 - Original defendant nos.3 to 7 ) .......................... Mr. Vijay Sapkal, Advocate, holding for Mr. R.P. Dhase, Advocate, for the petitioners. .......................... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : 16TH NOVEMBER 2009. COURT'S ORDER : 1. By way of present petition, the petitioners have challenged (2) the order dated 3rd August 2009, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Shirur (Kasar), below Exhibit 77 in Regular Civil Suit No. 114/2008 (Old No. 192/2006), thereby rejecting the application filed by the present petitioners for amendment to the written statement. 2. The application for amendment to the written statement was filed after the issues were framed and the affidavit in lieu of examination in chief, on behalf of the plaintiff was filed and the matter was for cross examination by the defendant. In the light of that, the learned Judge of the trial court relying on the judgment of the Apex Court, in the case of Vidyabai and others Vs. Padmalatha and another ((2009) 2 SCC 409), has rejected the application. The view taken by the learned Judge of the trial court is correct and in consonance with the law laid down by the Apex Court. 3. In that view of the matter, no case is made out for interference in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 4. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp6605