JUDGMENT :

Bharat P. Deshpande, J.

Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

2. Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties for final disposal at the stage of admission with consent.

3. Petitioners/plaintiffs prefer present petition thereby challenging the impugned order passed below Exh.73 dated 24.1.2023. By the said order, learned trial Court rejected the application filed for amendment of plaint.

4. Mr. Desai, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that amendment application was filed by the plaintiffs to add prayer of mandatory injunction however, the same has been rejected on the ground that such amendment is time barred.

5. Plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent and temporary injunction claiming that there exists a property bearing survey no.526/1 in Shiroda wherein there are houses belonging to different persons including mother and mother in law of plaintiffs. After the death of Smt. Nanu Pandharinath Shirodkar, inventory proceedings were conducted. Plaintiff no.1 is adopted son of Pandharinath Venkatesh Shirodkar and Smt. Nanu Pandharinath Shirodkar and accordingly suit properties were allotted to the plaintiffs. It is further their case that somewhere in 1.1.2015,