1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 989 OF 2008. IN SUIT NO.3746 OF 1994. Kamalakar Ratnakar Shenoy & ors. : Plaintiffs versus Smt.Mathurabai Dayashankar Patil & ors. : Defendants. And Dr.Ramesh Laxman Juvekar & ors. : Respondents. Shri Solomon i/by M/s.Solomon & Co. for the Plaintiffs. Ms.Trupti Shetty i/by M/s.Dhruve Liladhar & Co. for the Defendants. CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATED : OCTOBER 22, 2008 P.C. 1. By the above Chamber Summons the Applicants/Plaintiffs pray for setting aside the abatement of the suit as against Defendant No.16, for bringing the legal heirs of Defendant No.16 on record and for condonation of delay of 1962 days in filing the above Chamber Summons. 2 2. The reasons for the delay are mentioned in the affidavit in support of the Chamber Summons. 3. On behalf of the Respondents above named separate Affidavit in Reply has been filed. In so far as Respondent No.1 is concerned, he accepts that since he has an interest in the property in question i.e. Flat No.401 in the Network Co-op. Housing Society Ltd., he has no objection if he is brought on record as the heir of the deceased Defendant No.16. 4. So far as Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are concerned, they have, in para 1(d) of their Affidavits in Reply dated 25th August 2008, stated that they have relinquished their right, title and interest in respect of the suit flat No.401 in the Network Co-op. Housing Society Ltd and therefore there cannot be any cause of action against them and the cause of action could only be against the Respondent No.1. 5. In the light of the Affidavit in Reply dated 25th August 2008 3 filed by both the Respondent Nos.2 and 3, in my view, there is no necessity to implead the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 as the Defendants to the suit in their capacity as the heirs of the deceased Defendant No.16 as the Respondent No.1 herein would represent the interest of the Defendant No.16. 6. The Chamber Summons is, therefore, allowed to the extent of bringing the Respondent No.1 on record as the heir of deceased Defendant No.16 and is accordingly made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) restricted to the extent of the Respondent No.1 only. The Applicants/Plaintiffs accordingly to carry out the amendment in the Schedule annexed to the Chamber Summons so as to delete the Respondent Nos.2 and 3. Amendment in the cause title of the Plaint to be carried out within a period of eight weeks from date and an amended copy of the Plaint to be served on the concerned parties within eight weeks thereafter. [R.M.SAVANT, J]