IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. Chamber Summons No.1092 of 2005 in Suit No. 1968 of 2005 1. Parmanand T.Manwani & Anr. ..Plaintiffs vs. 1. Madan Devkishandas Bhatia and anr. ..Defendants and Surendra Laxman Rawal ..Proposed Defendant Mr.Sanjay Jain i/b Mr.Lalit Jain for plaintiffs Mr.M.P.Vashi for defendant no.1. Mr.Vishal Phal, A.G.P. for defendant no.2. Mr.A.A.Joshi for proposed defendant. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR J. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR J. 23rd August, 2005. 23rd August, 2005. 23rd August, 2005. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. This application deserves to be granted in view of the consent given by defendant no.1 as well as proposed defendant. Defendant no.2 appears through Counsel but he has no instructions to give consent on behalf of defendant no.2. In my opinion, in the interest of justice, this chamber summons deserves to be allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Amendment to be carried out within four weeks. 2. In so far as other reliefs are concerned, it will be open to the plaintiffs to take recourse to appropriate remedy as may be permissible by law. All questions are left open. 3. Proposed defendant is present in Court and has instructed his Advocate to give no objection for allowing this application. 4. No order as to costs.