MP 1 WP2305_11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2305 OF 2011 Shri Jaisingh R. Nageshkar ... Petitioner Versus Shri Rajendra S. Nageshkar and others ... Respondents Mr. Amit Borkar for Petitioner. Mr. P. S. Dani for Respondent No. 1. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. MONDAY, APRIL 11, 2011 P. C. : The petitioner challenges the order dated 27th October 2010 vide which the application filed by the respondent-plaintiff for amendment of the plaint came to be allowed. 2. It is the grievance of the petitioner that by way of amendment, not only the learned Trial Court has permitted a claim beyond limitation to be brought on record but has also decided that the said claim is within limitation. 3. Undisputedly, the trial is yet to commence. It is a settled law that the courts have to take liberal view in grant of amendments under Order VI, proviso to Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. However, since the trial is to commence, the said proviso would not be applicable. Insofar as the contention regarding the amendment permitting the time-barred claim to be brought on record is concerned, it is a settled law that while considering the application for amendment, the courts are not required to go into the merits of the matter. The petitioner can very well amend his written statement or file an additional written statement raising a ground that the claim is beyond limitation. MP 2 WP2305_11 If such a defence is taken, the learned Trial Court would be bound to frame issue regarding limitation and decide the same on the basis of evidence led by the parties in that behalf. 4. In that view of the matter, petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (B.R. GAVAI, J)