1 63-wp 7380.2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 7380 OF 2026 ( SHRI. RAHUL KAMALKISHORE RATHI VS MRS. SHITAL W/O. RAHUL RATHI @ KU. SHEETAL D/O. JAMNADAS KOTHARI ) Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or the directions, Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders. Mr. C.F.Bhagnani, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Omkar Deshpande, Advocate for respondent. CORAM : RAJNISH R. VYAS, J. DATE : OCTOBER 09, 2026 1) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner/husband instituted divorce proceedings before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Nagpur. After the examination and cross-examination of the husband, the wife entered the witness box and was undergoing cross-examination when an application for amendment under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, came to be filed. The petitioner has contended that since some Whatsapp messages were received those would be necessary to be brought on record for deciding the controversy in its proper perspective. He further submits that the trial Court rejected the application, which is contrary to the law. 2) With the help of the learned counsel for the petitioner, I have gone through the record of the case. The trial Court in paragraph 6 of the impugned order has categorically held that the matter is at final stage and only the cross examination of respondent-wife and arguments are remaining. The trial Court then observed that even if it is accepted that Whatsapp messages KOLHE 2026:BHC-NAG:13552 2 63-wp 7380.2026.odt were received recently, the question is whether same are necessary for determining the real controversy between the parties. In this background, the application was rejected. 3) Since the application for amendment was moved at the fag end of the proceedings and the material in the form of Whatsapp messages are already in possession of the petitioner- husband, he can always during the cross-examination of respondent-wife brought it on record, if permissible in law. As such, I do not find any perversity in the impugned order. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ( RAJNISH R. VYAS, J. ) KOLHE Signed by: Mr. Ravikant Kolhe Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 09/10/2026 18:19:11