Writ Petition No. 7781 of 2025 · Bombay High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- S G CHAPALGAONKAR
Outcome
Dismissed
Hence, WritPetition stands dismissed
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 227
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. In result, no case is made out to cause interference in impugned order under Article 227 of Constitution of India. Hence, WritPetition stands dismissed. (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR)JUDGE Tandale
Judgment
-1- 5-WP-7781-2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADWRIT PETITION NO. 7781 OF 2025VATSALABAI YESU CHANDE AND OTHERSVERSUSTHE SECRETARY MAKA VIKAS KARYAKARI SEVA SOCIEITY LTD. AND ANOTHER......Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Tejas Sanjay Kotkar Advocate for Respondents : Mr. A. G. Ambetkar...…CORAM :S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.DATED :08th JUNE, 2026. PER COURT :
The petitioners impugns order dated 03.05.2025 passed by learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Newasa, Dist. Ahmednagar in Regular Civil Suit No.1167 of 2020 whereby petitioners’ application seeking amendment in plaint has been rejected.
Perusal of impugned order shows that petitioners sought amendment in plaint only on ground that defendants had placed on record a copy of order dated 10.06.2024 passed by DeputySuperintendent of Land Records. The Trial Court considered nature of dispute between the parties. It has been observed that dispute relates to identity of Survey No.276/2/A and City Survey No.572. The question requires determination in suit is whether Survey No.572 and City Survey -2- 5-WP-7781-2025No.276/2/A are one and the same. The Trial Court further observed that plaintiff has also conducted cross examination. Considering stage of proceeding, amendment in plaint was not permissible.
On careful consideration of factual aspect of matter, pleading of parties and submissions advanced, this Court finds that amendment asclaimed was not necessary to determine real question of controversy between parties. The view taken by trial Court is in consonance with factual aspect of matter and settled legal position. Further there is no explanation as to why application for amendment was not moved at earlier stage of proceeding i.e. before commencement of trial.
Operative part
In result, no case is made out to cause interference in impugned order under Article 227 of Constitution of India. Hence, WritPetition stands dismissed. (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR)JUDGE Tandale
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Hence, WritPetition stands dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 227.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.