1 W.P. 6776.2011 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6776 OF 2011 Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders ................................ CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 09/12/2011. Mr. B.R. Kedar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.S.Bora, Advocate for the respondents. .......................... PER COURT : 1. Mr. B.R.Kedar, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the present amendment application was rejected, the present petitioner is dispossessed and as such the amendment in respect of injunction would not be relevant and the initial prayer made in the Suit itself would be proper. The learned counsel submits that in view of the subsequent events, the part of the present amendment application would not survive. 2. Mr. S.S.Bora, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner is not dispossessed by the respondents pursuant to any order of injunction and the respondents are in possession prior to filing of the Suit, 2 W.P. 6776.2011 wherein the injunction was granted. 3. Mr. Kedar, the learned counsel seeks leave to withdraw the amendment application with liberty to file fresh one. 4. Taking into account the fact that the petitioner is now contending that the relief of injunction would not be relevant. I do not see any impediment in allowing the petitioner to withdraw the said amendment application with liberty to file fresh one. 5. In light of the above, the application [ Exh. 58 ] filed by the petitioner in R.C.S. No. 36 of 2009 is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file fresh amendment application. If such an application is filed, the trial Court shall consider the said application on its own merits without being influenced by the order passed on Exh. 58. 6. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J. ] KNP/W.P. 6776.2011