-: 1 :- HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 103 OF 2010 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 388 OF 2008 Rajendra Nemichand Kothari. ..Plaintiff. Versus Surendra Bohra. ..Defendant. Ms. S. R. Kumbhat for the plaintiff. Mr. Paritosh Jaiswal a/w A. Purohit for the defendant. Coram : R. V. MORE, J. Date : February 15, 2010. P. C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. This chamber summons is taken out by the plaintiff to amend the plaint and Summons for Judgment No.86 of 2008 in terms of the Schedule annexed to Chamber Summons. The plaintiff wants to substitute words “dishonoured cheques” by the words “the said MOU”. The statement of claim at page 57 discloses that the plaintiff has filed suit on the basis of MOU dated 7th October 2006. Even paragraph 10 of the plaint makes a reference to MOU dated 7th October 2006. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that the proposed amendment will not change the nature of suit nor it is inconsistent with the averments in plaint. I also do not find substance in the case of the defendant that the proposed amendment, if granted, will amount to withdrawal of admission. In that view of the matter and for the -: 2 :- reasons stated in the affidavit-in-support, chamber summons is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Necessary amendment be carried out within the period of two weeks from today and thereafter within the period of two weeks plaintiff shall serve amended copy of the plaint and summons for judgment on all concerned. (R.V. MORE, J.)