R.C. Chavan, J.

1. Heard. Admit.

2. By consent, taken up for final hearing. The learned counsel for the respondent - Ori. plaintiff states that he has no objection to the amendment proposed in para. No. 4 of the amendment application, whereby name of Ramdas Maroti Amle is sought to be added as a necessary party to the suit. In fact, the Hon'ble Single Judge had dealt with only this aspect of the amendment application and since the respondent himself concedes to the necessity of such amendment, the order to that extent would have to go. The learned counsel for the respondent, however, has objection to the amendment whereby the result of a case of grant of Succession Certificate is sought to be pleaded at the end of para. No. 19 of the written statement. The learned counsel states that he opposes this amendment since the order on the application for Succession Certificate was passed in the year 1995 when the suit was very much pending and therefore, that amendment could have carried out at that time. The learned counsel for the appellant points out that the appellant did not hastily carry out this amendment because after the decision of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) in the applicati