1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.281 OF 2007 IN SUIT NO.203 OF 2007 Manju Rakesh Jain ...Plaintiff Vs. Arvind Kashinath Bandekar ...Defendant And Wama Swarup Construction Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent Mr.D..Madon, Sr. Counsel with Mr.D.H.Mehta with Ms. S. Pathak for Plaintiff Mr.Yogesh Adhia for Defendant Mr.Rao with Mr. Shah for Respondent CORAM: SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED: 2ND SEPTEMBER, 2008 P.C. 1. This Chamber Summons is taken out for amendment of the plaint and to bring the Respondent on record, pursuant to subsequent events that have transpired. It is the Plaintiff's case, that after filing of the suit and after taking out the first Notice of Motion in the Suit, he was never informed that the Defendants have entered into a Conveyance of the suit property with the Respondent. Hence, the Respondent is sought to be brought on record of 2 the Suit as proper and necessary party consequent, upon the transaction in the Suit. 2. The Chamber Summons is opposed on the ground that the Respondent has developed and constructed the entire property under the MOU, which was to be acted upon within four months and that the Suit may be barred by the law of limitation. Those are not the considerations before the Court in an application for bringing a party on record of the Suit, consequent upon subsequent events. 3. The Advocate for the Respondent has drawn my attention to the judgment in the case of Anil Kumar Singh Vs. Shivnath Misera (1995) 3 SCC, 147, in which a party who acquired a subsequent interest as co-owner by virtue of a decree stated to have been obtained by collusion and not by assignment, or creation or devolution of an interest and was not brought on record. He sought to have interest as a co-owner in the land by operation of a decree passed in another proceedings. He was not a party to the contract. He was not sought to be brought on record upon a devolution, assignment or creation of an interest during the pendency of a Suit. The case of the party who was sought to be brought on record in the case was under an independent decree. He 3 did not have direct interest in the matter arising from the same transaction. Such is not this application. 4. The Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). 5. The other prayers are not pressed. The merits of the case of the parties cannot and is not decided in this Chamber Summons. 6. The Plaintiff shall amend the plaint within two weeks. 7. The Plaintiff shall serve the copy of the amended plaint upon the Respondents. 8. Advocate appearing for Respondents waives service for Respondents. (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J.)