Wp4692/11 1 order IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 4692 of 2011 Edulji Framji Dotivalla Ginning and Pressing Factory Ltd. Vs. Mah. State Cooperative Growers Marketing Federation Ltd. And others. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. J.J. Chandurkar, counsel for petitioner. Mr. C.V. Kale, counsel for respondent nos.1to 3. Mrs. Deshmukh, AGP, for respondent no. 4. . CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK J. DATE : 13 th December, 2011. By this petition, the petitioner impugns the order passed by the Civil Judge, Jr. Dn., Amravati, on 02.08.2011, allowing an application filed by the respondent-defendant for amendment of the written statement. The petitioner is the original plaintiff. It was the case of the plaintiff that though the respondent was entitled to monetary benefits as were applicable to an 'A' Grade factory, the plaintiff was paid money by treating the factory of the petitioner as a 'B' grade factory. It was the case of the respondent-defendant that the factory of the petitioner-plaintiff was never given an 'A' grade but was given 'B' grade and this was also informed to the petitioner by various communications. After the petitioner examined its witness and the witness was cross-examined by the respondent, it is case of the respondent, that on perusal of various documents it was revealed that the petitioner was taking advantage of the fact that on Wp4692/11 2 order the gradation form used for the gradation of the factory for the session 2004-05, the session was shown as 2001-02 and thereby the petitioner fraudulently asked the defendant-respondent to pay the difference of ginning and pressing charges as were applicable to 'A' grade factory. According to the respondent, since the plaintiff was well aware of the correspondence between the parties and since the proposed amendment went to the root of the matter, it was necessary to allow the amendment application. Though the petitioner strongly opposed the amendment application, the trial court allowed the application subject to payment of costs of Rs. 250/-. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the trial court rightly observed that the proposed amendment did not change the nature of the suit and was necessary for effectively deciding the dispute between the parties. The court further found that since the document on the basis of which the proposed amendment was sought to be made was already exhibited, the proposed amendment would not cause any serious prejudice to the petitioner. On a perusal of the amendment application, it appears that the proposed amendment went to the root of the matter and was necessary for effectively deciding whether the factory of the petitioner was an 'A' grade or a 'B' grade factory. In this background, the trial court did not give much importance to the proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure as the proposed amendment was able to throw considerable light on the controversy involved in the suit and was necessary for effectively deciding the same. There is no jurisdictional error in the order passed by the trial court. Wp4692/11 3 order In the result, the writ petition fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs. However, the petitioner would be entitled to make consequential amendment and also tender evidence on the facts stated in the proposed amendment, if the petitioner so desires. JUDGE Hirekhan.