1 WP No.4583/11 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4583 of 2011 Annappa Yashwant Dalvi ... Petitioner versus Prabhakar Kondiba Chavan and ors ... Respondents ... Mr. Umesh Kurud i/b V.S.Kokitkar for the petitioner. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 12th August 2011 P.C. 1. By this petition, the petitioner (original defendant) challenges the order dated 22 February 2011 passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Jr. Division, Gadhinglaj, allowing the application for amendment in the plaint made by the plaintiff. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application for amendment was hit by proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. On being asked, he fairly concedes that only the issues were framed and affidavit of evidence was not filed. In the circumstances, the trial had not commenced and the application for amendment is not barred by proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code. 2 WP No.4583/11 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner then submitted that issues were framed in the year 2009 and there was a delay in making of the application for amendment. It is settled principle of law that mere delay is no ground for refusing the amendment. Amendments have been allowed even at the stage of appeal and second appeal. In the present case, amendment was sought before the commencement of the trial and as such, a mere delay of about a year after the framing of the issues cannot be a ground for refusing of the amendment. No other ground was urged. There is no merit in the writ petition which is hereby rejected. (D.G.KARNIK, J)