1 dgm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6189 OF 2008 -------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court’s or Judge’s of Coram, appearances, Court’s Orders orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. ------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.Sanjeev R. Singh for the petitioners. Mr.A.R.Pande for respondents 3 to 16. CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED : 30.09.2008 P.C. In the present petition, the petitioners have challenged the order of rejection of their amendment to the plaint. After considering the rival submissions and going through the papers including the averments made in the plaint as well as in the application for amendment, I am inclined to grant this amendment as the averments made in the present application/chamber summons is after collecting the information/certiied copies which was admittedly not 2 available at the relevant time. The same document, as contended by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent, though available need no further material to be added in the plaint in such manner at this stage. The allegation of fraud and misrepresentation as raised always need basic pleadings. Considering the earlier pleadings already raised, I am of the view that for proper adjudication without observing anything on the merits of the amendment application and/or its content, an opportunity need to be given to the plaintiffs to put their case on merits. Taking all this into account, the impugned order is quashed and set aside. The amendment application is allowed. However, all pleas and/or defences are kept open to be agitated. Writ petition is accordingly allowed. [ANOOP [ANOOP [ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.) V. MOHTA,J.) V. MOHTA,J.)