1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO: 425/2008 (Dinesh Shankarrao Ghangal vs. Sudhir Dhondopant Dharmakar and others) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram Court's or Judges Order appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders. .................................................................................................................................................................. CORAM: B.R. GAVAI , J. DATED: 05 th February, 2008. *** By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 13 th December, 2007 vide which the application filed by the present petitioner for amendment of written statement came to be rejected. 2. Heard Shri W.M. Quazi, learned counsel for petitioner. He submits that by way of amendment, the petitioner only wanted to bring on record the date on which the agreement of rent was entered into between the parties. He submits that the said amendment did not change the nature of the defence and no prejudice whatsoever could have been caused to the plaintiff. He further submits that, in any case, the plaintiff can be compensated if the amendment is allowed. 3. Undoubtedly the suit is filed after the 2 amendment to the Civil Procedure Code in 2002. Proviso to Order VI Rule 17 of CPC specifically bars an amendment which could have been carried out with exercise of due diligence prior to commencement of the trial. The agreement was executed on 24.9.1994. If the petitioner would have exercised due diligence, he could have carried out such an amendment prior to commencement of the trial. 4. In that view of the matter, no interference could be made in the order passed by learned trial Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Hence rejected. JUDGE sahare