1 WP No.5669/10 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.5669 of 2010 New Navrang Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. ... Petitioner versus Shri Subhash Amolakchand Gandhi ... Respondent ... Mr.R.M. Nakhawa i/b S.A. Bhagwat for the petitioner. Mr.Kishore Jain i/b Tushar Goradia and Tushar Parmar for the respondent. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATED : 18th August 2010 P.C. 1. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 5 July 2010 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Bombay allowing the application of the respondent plaintiff for amendment of the plaint. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the observation of the learned Judge that trial had not commenced and therefore proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure was not attracted was not correct. He submitted that trial had commenced before the application was made. The suit was filed in the year 1999 i.e. prior to the amendment of the Code of Civil Procedure by the 2 WP No.5669/10 Amendment Act of 2002. In state of Haryana Vs. Town Municipal Council 2007 (1) SCC 765, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that proviso added to Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure is not applicable to suits which have been instituted prior to the amendment of the Code. In view of this, even if it is assumed that trial had commenced that could not have been a ground for rejection of the amendment. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the amendment is superfluous inasmuch as what is sought to be added by the proposed amendment already exists in the original plaint. If so, no prejudice would be caused to the petitioner defendant by allowing the amendment. If there is some elaboration of what is already stated in the plaint that cannot be a ground for rejection of the amendment. There is no merit in the writ petition which is hereby rejected. (D.G. KARNIK,J.)