R.V. Ghuge, J.

1. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties at length.

2. The petitioners are challenging the order passed by the trial Court in Special Civil Suit No. 81 of 2008, below Exhibit 73, by which the application for amendment has been allowed and the respondents herein are permitted to carry out amendment, subject to costs of Rs. 500/-.

3. Contentions of Shri Dixit, learned Sr. Advocate appearing for the petitioners, can be summarised as follows:-

(1) CTS 159, situated at Jalna, was in the name of Rampyaribai, who is the grand-mother of petitioner No. 2 and mother of petitioner No. 1.

(2) Ramnivas, the original petitioner is the father of petitioner No. 2.

(3) There are two shops said to be in permissive possession of respondent No. 1.

(4) The three respondents are real brothers, who operated their business from the two shops taken on rent from the petitioners.

(5) They have altered the two shop premises and converted them into a single shop.

(6) In June 1994, the petitioners' father Ramnivas was in need of approximately Rs. 6,00,000/-.

(7) He has taken a loan of Rs. 6,00,000/- from the defendants.

(8) The loan was to be repaid and until then the shops were to