SQP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6174 OF 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2005 OF 2008 Bhaskar S.Shetty ...Petitioner Versus Dnyaneshwar Laxman Bankar & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mr.S.B.Prabhavalkar for Petitioner. None for Respondents. ...... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. SEPTEMBER 10, 2008. SEPTEMBER 10, 2008. SEPTEMBER 10, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the Petitioner. 2. Assuming that there is substance in the argument of the Petitioner that the Trial Court has committed error in rejecting the Application for amendment of the Plaint, however, in my opinion, the mistake can be corrected in the substantive appeal if required to be filed by the Petitioner in : 2 : future in the event of suit being decided against the Petitioner. 3. Keeping all question in that behalf open, I decline to exercise discretionary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, which approach is consistent with the observations of the Apex Court in Paragraph 39 in (2003) 6 SCC (2003) 6 SCC (2003) 6 SCC 675 in Surya Dev Rai vs. Ram Chander Rai & Ors. 675 in Surya Dev Rai vs. Ram Chander Rai & Ors. 675 in Surya Dev Rai vs. Ram Chander Rai & Ors. 4. Petition dismissed with the above observations. 5. In view of the dismissal of the Writ Petition, Civil Application stands disposed of. A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.