1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY AND INTESTATE JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.46 OF 2006 IN MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.12 OF 2003 IN PETITION NO.100 OF 2001 Smt.Bhavana Ram Punjabi. ...Petitioner. vs. 1.Smt.Smita Ram Punjabi & another. ...Respondents. --- Mr. H.H.Trivedi, for Petitioner. Mr.G.K.Karkera, for Respondents. CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH,J. DATED: 7th July, 2006. P.C.:- 1. This chamber summons has been taken out by the petitioner. The learned Counsel appearing for petitioner states that this is the only chamber summons taken out by him for seeking amendment in the petition. By the proposed amendment, the petitioner proposes to raise additional ground in support of his case that the letter of administration granted by this Court is 2 liable to be revoked. The amendment is opposed on behalf of the other side on the ground that the plea raised by the petitioner has no substance and that it is contradictory and inconsistent with the plea earlier raised. The settled law is that the Court while allowing the amendment does not go into merit of the plea. The person raising the plea may succeed in proving it or may not succeed, but only because there is likelihood of his not being able to prove it, he can not be prevented from raising that plea. So far as the submission that the plea is inconsistent is concerned, even inconsistent plea can be raised by a party. The chamber summons is granted in terms of prayer clause (a). Amendment to be carried out within a period of two weeks from today. The respondents to file his reply to the plea included by amendment within a period of four weeks from today. ---