1 wp9337.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. 9337 of 2010 Mr. Tanaji Krishna Koli (Gourikar) Nakhava & anr. ... Petitioner v/s. Mr. Anant (Anath) Krushna Koli (Gourikar) Nakhava ..Respondent Mr. Vijay Gharat for the petitioner. CORAM:- B.R. GAVAI, J. DATED :- MARCH 11, 2011. P.C. By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 9th August, 2010 vide which the application filed by the respondent- plaintiff for amendment of plaint came to be allowed. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that amendment which is carried out is barred by law of limitation. 2 wp9337.10.sxw 3. Admittedly, the trial of the suit is yet to commence. In that view of the matter, no error could be noticed with the order passed by the learned trial Judge in allowing the application for amendment. 4. It is settled law that at the stage of grant of amendment, the merits of the matter need to be looked into. If it is the grievance of the petitioner that amendment is barred by law of limitation and not connected with the matter, the Respondent can always take such a plea in additional written- statement that it would file, as a consequence to the amendment to the plaint and the learned trial Court, if such a plea is raised would always be required to consider the same in accordance with evidence that would be led before it. 5. Petition is,therefore, dismissed with aforesaid observations. (B.R. GAVAI, J)