FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.4425 OF 2008 ___________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _______________________|___________________________________ This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 21st June, 2008 passed by the Iind C.J.S.D., Aurangabad. 2 The learned Counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the contents of the application which is at Exh.D (Page 30) to the compilation and submitted that the petitioner wanted to amend the written statement and accordingly the said application was filed mentioning therein the amendments which the petitioner wished to carry out to the written statement. The learned Counsel further submitted that the proposed amendment which is mentioned in paragraph 3 is allowed. However, the learned Judge erroneously rejected the prayer of the petitioner to incorporate other proposed amendments in paragraph 2, 3 5, 6 and 7. The learned Counsel submits that no prejudice would be caused to the other side if written statement is amended. He further submits that the agreement is silent on the point of rate of interest and therefore, it was necessary to put forth the case of the petitioner to that effect. The learned Counsel further invited my attention to the pleadings in the petition, grounds therein and annexures thereto and submitted that that in the interest of justice, the application for amendment to the written statement should have been allowed in toto. 3 The learned Counsel for the respondents vehemently opposed the petition and submitted that if the amendments as prayed in the application are allowed, certainly it would prejudice the respondents. Therefore, he prays that the writ petition may not be entertained. 4 After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and on perusal of the application, which was filed to bring amendments to the written statement, it is clear that the contents of the application are silent about the fact that the petitioner was prevented by sufficient cause in not incorporating the amendments in the written statement. It is not in dispute that trial in the suit has already begun and it is at the stage where the petitioner has to lead evidence. 5 In order to satisfy the provisions of Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the application which is filed for amendment to the written statement, that too, after trial has commenced, should have disclosed the fact that the petitioner / original defendant was prevented by sufficient cause in not incorporating the averments in proposed amendment at the time of filing written statement. Therefore, in my considered view, the learned Judge has rightly declined to allow the application in toto. No infirmity can be attributed to the impugned order. Hence, the writ petition is devoid of any merits and the same is dismissed. (S.S. SHINDE, J). 21.08.2009. PLK/#