1 PGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE Writ Petition No.10435 of 2009 Mr.Sitaram B. Chuniwala .. .. Petitioner v/s. Mr.Anil M. Khedekar & ors. .. .. Respondents Mr.A.M. Gokhale i/by Mr.M.B. Kotak for Petitioner. Ms.P.S. Cardozo, AGP for Res.No.3. Mrs.A.A. Agarwal for Res.No.2. ---- CORAM : SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED : 12th March, 2010 P.C. : 1.Rule, returnable forthwith. 2.The Writ Petition challenges the order refusing amendment to Claim Application No.1870 of 1999. The impugned order dated 6.8.2009 has rejected the Application for amendment on the ground that the Amendment Application was not sought even though the issues were framed since July 2005 and, therefore, there was a prolonged delay in proposing the amendment. 3.The amendment is made on the footing that the Petitioner / Applicant continues to incur expenses due to the injuries sustained by the Applicant in the 2 accident which is the subject matter of the Claim Application. The Claim Application is made in 1999. Until July 2005, the issues were not framed. After the issues were framed in July 2005, the evidence has not been recorded. If the Petitioner continues to undergo treatment and consequently, incurs expenses of that treatment, the Petitioner cannot be expected to go on making amendment after amendment for claiming the expenses. Since the Applications are not taken up for hearing immediately upon filing or even immediately upon framing the issues, the Petitioner, in such a case, would have to wait until the matter becomes ripe for hearing so as to make the application once and for all for claiming all the expenses of the treatment that he has undergone. Of course, the grant of the expenses would be subject to the Petitioner making out his case on merits. 4.The impugned order shows that there is no substantive substance to show that the Petitioner was treated. If that is so, the application made and the amount claimed would be rejected upon hearing the Claim Application on merits. That is not the reason for not allowing the amendment. 5.The amendments have to be allowed to bring the truth on record. The Court is interested in only ascertaining 3 the truth of the parties and hence in such an application, technicalities play no role. 6.The impugned order is incorrect. The amendments are required to be allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The Petitioner / Claimant / Applicant shall make the amendment subject to payment of Court fees. Of course, his claim shall be considered on merits. 7.The Writ Petition is allowed and Rule is made absolute accordingly. 8.No order as to costs. 9.In view of the order passed in the Writ Petition, Civil Application No.430 of 2010 taken out in this Writ Petition does not survive and it is disposed of accordingly. (SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J.)