1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.9711 OF 2009 The Chairman, Shri Bhavan Education Society. ....Petitioner V/s. 1. The State of Maharashtra & ors. ....Respondents Mr. G.N. Salunke with Mr. H.G. Wakshe for the Petitioner. Mr. P.I. Khemani, AGP, for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2. Mr. Anant Vadgaonkar for the Respondent No.3. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 7TH JANUARY, 2010. P.C. :- 1. Rule. 2. By consent, the rule is made returnable forthwith and heard finally. 3. The impugned order has rejected the Petitioner’s application for amendment. The learned Judge has observed that by having failed 2 to incorporate the facts now sought to be introduced in the written statement as originally filed, the Petitioner had relinquished its rights to refer to such facts. I am, with respect, unable to agree. There is no question of relinquishment in a case such as this. The amendments could be disallowed on the well established exceptions such as the withdrawal of an admission or the same being barred by limitation. 4. It was contended on behalf of the Respondents that the statements made in the proposed amendment are false. That too is an aspect which cannot be gone into at a stage for consideration of an application for amendment. The correctness or otherwise of the averments will be decided at the hearing of the appeal. 5. With the above clarification, the impugned order is set aside. The amendment is allowed. It is clarified, however, that all the contentions on facts are kept open. Further, the amendment will be subject to limitation. 6. The amendment shall be carried out on or before 31st January, 2010. Liberty to the Respondents to file additional affidavit/rejoinder to the amendment. 3 7. The time to dispose of the appeal is extended upto and including 30th April, 2010. 8. Writ Petition, accordingly, stands disposed of.