The court emphasized the importance of framing appropriate issues and ensuring proper notice to the defendants in the context of allowing the petitioner to amend the plaint in a pending suit.

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner by learned Counsel Mr. A.M. Tirukh. According to him, though the respondents were served and the petition was listed for final disposal, they are absent.

2. It is the grievance of the petitioner (original plaintiff) in Regular Civil Suit No.39 of 2008 pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Karanja Lad, District Washim that commencement of evidence has not yet been fixed in the pending suit while pleadings were being completed. The plaintiff moved an application for amendment of the plaint in the suit for partition, separate possession and mesne profit. The plaintiff felt it necessary to incorporate pleadings by way of amendment of the plaint so that appropriate issues can be framed and the defendants are put to proper notice in respect of the pleadings by the plaintiff. However, the learned trial Judge considered mere opposition to the application for amendment in the plaint and on the ground that the plaintiff has sought amendment previously also, felt that there was no necessity to permit amendment and rejected the application with cost of Rs.1000/.

It is under these circumstances that the petitioner has moved this Court.

3. I have perused the impugned order. It appears that the learned trial Judge is concerned with expeditious disposal of the suit as, according to him, proposed amendment would cause delay in disposal of the suit. Hence, he rejected the application for amendment.

4. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, issues were framed but affidavit of evidence was not furnished and therefore, the plaintiff could have been granted opportunity to amend the pleadings. He placed reliance upon the ruling in the case of M/s. Hindustan Computers vs. M/s. Dart Computers Ltd. and Others reported in 2014 (1) ALL MR 841 whereby this Court was pleased to grant the application for amendment, though issues were framed but the trial was yet to commence.

Considering the fact that recording of evidence has not yet commenced in the pending suit, no serious prejudice would be caused to the defendants if the prayer for amending the plaint is granted subject to payment of cost in the sum of Rs.500/.

That being so, the impugned order is set aside. The petitioner shall be permitted to amend the plaint subject to payment of cost of Rs.500/-payable to the defendants.

Amendment shall be carried out within four weeks from the date of this order and the defendants shall be at liberty to file their additional Written Statement, if any, within two weeks from the date of service of copy of amended plaint.

It is made clear that the point of limitation is kept open to be agitated in the trial Court.

Rule is made absolute in the above terms.