1chs-445-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS No. 445 of 2010 IN SUIT No. 104 of 2010. Hemlekha Atul Mehta .. .. Plaintiff. versus Vanita Jayantilal Mehta .. .. Defendants. Ms Sumedha Rao, Advocate for the Plaintiff. None for the defendants. CORAM:- S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J DATED :- 9th December, 2010. P.C.:- 1. Ms Rao, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff, states that chamber summons is duly served on defendant Nos. 1 to 6 and she has instructions not to press for any relief in so far as joining of Respondent as proposed defendant. She submits that the plaintiff has instructed her to state that the proposed defendant has already left the premises and, therefore, his joinder is not necessary. Chamber summons is dismissed on the statement made by Ms Rao, as against the proposed defendant No.7 and the amendment to the extent of his joinder, is refused. 2. The chamber summons is duly served on defendant Nos. 1 to 6 and Ms Rao L 2chs-445-10 undertakes to file affidavit proving service within a period of one week from today. 3. Perused the chamber summons and affidavit in support. The plaintiff desires to place on record certain events, which the plaintiff has pleaded certain in the affidavit in support and submits that these are part of her pleadings i.e. original plaint. However, she has inadvertently omitted to seek relief of possession of suit flat in which she has a share. According to her, she claims title and ownership in respect of this flat. 4. Having perused this chamber summons, the affidavit in support and finding that there is no reply, so also the proposed amendment does not alter the cause of action nor it can be said to be mala fide, this chamber summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Plaint be amended in terms of schedule. 5. Amendment be carried out within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J) L