1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. Chamber Summons No.1715 of 2008 IN Suit No.2841 of 1985 Mohamed Yakub Haji Ahmed Behlim & anr. ..Plaintiffs v/s. Mohamed Umer Abdul Gafoor Khatri & anr. ..Defendants Mr.T.J . Jain i/by B.Z. Dalvi for Plffs. Mr.P.N. Ganwani i/by Soloman & Co. for Deft.No.1 Mr.A. Joshi i/by LJ Law for Deft.No.2 . ------ CORAM : SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. Dated : 26 th March 2009 P.C. : 1. The Defendants have sought to amend their Written Statement. The Defendants have sought to rely upon the Tenancy Agreement dated 22.4.1999. The Suit has been filed in 1995. The Written Statement was filed on 5.4.1999. The alleged Tenancy Agreement came to be in existence on 22nd April 1999, the fortnight after the filing of the Written Statement. This was to the knowledge of the Defendants. No application has been made by the Defendants from 1999 to bring this additional fact on record by way of additions / amendments to the Written Statement. 2. It is contended that at the time of the filing of the Written 2 Statement Defendant Nos.1 and 2 were represented by a single Advocate. Thereafter they are represented separately by 2 different Advocates and hence this amendment is sought. This amendment has nothing to do with the legal representation which has changed many years after the Written Statement has been filed. 3. This case is on all fours the facts of the case of Vidyabai & ors. vs. Padmalatha & anr., (2009) 2 SCC 409 . It has been held in that case that amendment to the Written Statement sought to be made after commencement of trial to bring on record documents cannot be allowed. The trial commences when the issues are framed. The issues have been framed in this Suit. The Affidavit of examination- in-chief is also filed. The cross- examination of the Plaintiff's witness has also commenced. The application for amendment is to be disallowed. 4. The Chamber Summons is dismissed. No order as to costs. (SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J.)