Mrs. Juliana Joseph D'Mello vs Mr. Tutukulla Vayankattasubhaia ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1352 Bom

                                                                   29.10074.18 wp.doc

ISM
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                                CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                               WRIT PETITION NO. 10074 OF 2018


      Mrs. Juliana Joseph D'Mello                                          ....Petitioner

              V/s.

      Mr. Tutukulla Vayankattasubhaia                             .....Respondents
      Mallayya and another

      Mr. R. V. Govilkar i/b Govilkar & Associates for the Petitioner


                               CORAM :   NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

                               DATE:     JANUARY 20, 2021.

      P.C.:

      1]      Though served, none appears for Respondent. In Appeal,

Plaintiff-Respondent has moved an Application Exh. 15 for carrying

out amendment to the Plaint. The nature of amendment sought to be

carried out is in regard to change/correction in the plot numbers i.e.

original Plot No. 65 now claimed to be Plot No. 8 & 9 by the

Defendants.

29.10074.18 wp.doc

2] It appears that ownership of the Plaintiff is not objected,

however, in para 14 of the impugned Judgment, it has been observed

by the court below that proposed lay out fled by the Plaintiff was not

part and parcel of her sale deed, however, there is no sanction map

so as to exactly identify the property/location of plot no. 65.

3] It is these observations on the basis of which Petitioner-Plaintiff

is seeking amendment so as to specify the claim with detail.

4] The fact remains that the foundation was already laid by the

Petitioner in the Plaint about the existence of the property and its

ownership, what is sought to be clarifed by way of amendment is plot

number.

5] As such, in my opinion, no prejudice will be caused to the other

side if the amendment is granted.

6] Even otherwise Respondents though served have not chosen to

29.10074.18 wp.doc

appear before this Court. In that view of the matter, amendment as

prayed stands allowed. Impugned order dated 03/01/2018 passed by

District Judge-9, Pune in R.C.A. No. 803/2012 is hereby quashed

and set aside. Petitioner to carry out amendment in the Suit

proceedings within period of 4 weeks from today. Petition is allowed.

[NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.]