1 wp10220.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. 10220 of 2010 Smt. Lata Suryakant Waikar & anr. ... Petitioners v/s. Smt. Rekha Ashok Mahalgaonkar & anr. ... Respondents Mr. Avinash Joshi for the petitioners. Mr. Rajesh Datar for the respondents. CORAM:- B.R. GAVAI, J DATED :- MARCH 24, 2011. P.C. By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 9th August, 2010 and 7th October, 2010 vide which the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune has allowed the application filed by the respondent no. 1-plaintiff for amendment of the plaint. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that learned trial Court has grossly erred in allowing the amendment, inasmuch as, the amendment allows the cause of action which is beyond limitation. He submits that learned trial Court has grossly erred in holding that the amendment was not 2 wp10220.10.sxw barred by law of limitation. 3. Admittedly, even the issues are not yet framed in the trial Court. As such the proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 would not be applicable to the facts of the present case. 4. Insofar as grievance of the petitioner regarding limitation is concerned, it is settled law that Courts at the stage of grant of an application for amendment are not required to go into the merits of the matter. 5. In that view of the matter, I find that the observations of the learned trial Court to the effect that amendment was within limitation was totally unwarranted. 6. The petitioners can always raise the grounds regarding limitation either by filing an additional written-statement or amending the written- statement. If such a ground is raised, the learned trial Court would be required to consider the same on the basis of the evidence that would be led by the parties. 3 wp10220.10.sxw Petition is, therefore, disposed of with aforesaid observations. (B.R. GAVAI, J)