Bombay High Court

CHANDRAKANT NARAYAN PATIL AND ORSversusPRAMOD KESHAV PATIL AND ORS

Decided: 8 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The District Judge did not err in refusing the amendment, and the petition is dismissed.

Summary

The petitioners sought to amend their plaint at the appellate stage to address grounds on which the trial court had non-suited them. The District Judge of Raigad Alibag rejected the application for amendment on 14 October 2025. The petitioners challenged this order by filing a writ petition in the Bombay High Court. The High Court examined whether the District Judge erred in refusing the amendment and held that the judge had not committed any error. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed and the appellate court was directed to decide the appeal on its own merits without being influenced by the impugned order.

Issues considered

Did the District Judge err in rejecting the application for amendment of the plaint at the appellate stage?
Can the appellate court be influenced by the observations in the impugned order while deciding the appeal?

Subjects

amendment of plaint
appellate stage
civil procedure
writ petition
district judge order
dismissal

Judgment

                                                                                            17.WP.3940.2026.doc
ANANT
KRISHNA
NAIK
Digitally signed by
ANANT KRISHNA
NAIK
Date: 2026.09.09
19:23:40 +0530
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                             CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                               WRIT PETITION NO. 3940 OF 2026

                      Chandrakant Narayan Patil & Ors                                 ...Petitioners.
                           Versus
                      Pramod Keshav Patil & Ors                                      ...Respondents

                      Mr. Rohit D. Joshi for the Petitioners.

                                                         CORAM         : N. J. JAMADAR, J.

                                                         DATE          : 8th SEPTEMBER, 2026

                      P.C.

                      1.     Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioners.

                      2.     The challenge in this Petition is to an order dated 14/10/2025 passed by the

                      learned District Judge, Raigad Alibag whereby an Application seeking amendment of

                      the plaint at the appellate stage came to be rejected by the learned District Judge.

                      3.     The Petitioners/Plaintiffs intended to carry out the amendment to overcome the

                      reasons assailed by the learned Civil judge while non-suiting the Plaintiffs on the

                      premise that the reasons where not sustainable. Such being the cause for seeking the

                      amendment, the learned District Judge has not committed any error in declining to

                      grant permission to amend the Plaint at the Appellate stage.

                      4.     However, notwithstanding the rejection of the Application for amendment in

                      the Plaint, Appellant would be at liberty to demonstrate on the basis of available

                      pleading and evidence on record that the findings recorded by the Trial Court are



                      Akn                                       1
                                                                    17.WP.3940.2026.doc

incorrect.

5.     At the time of the final hearing of the Appeal, the Appellate Court shall decide

the Appeal on its own merits and without being influenced by the any of the

observations in impugned order.

6.     The Writ Petition stands disposed.



                                                       ( N. J. JAMADAR, J. )




Akn                                      2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…