(-1-) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7589 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 7589 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 7589 OF 2004 Smt. Pushpa Bansilal Wadhawa and Ors. ...Petitioners Versus The Municipal Corpn. of Greater Bombay & Ors. ...Respondents ..... Mr. Rakesh M. Pandey, counsel for Petitioners Mr. J.G. Damani, counsel for Respondents 2 to 5 ..... CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE, J. B. H. MARLAPALLE, J. B. H. MARLAPALLE, J. DATED: 17TH MARCH, 2005 DATED: 17TH MARCH, 2005 DATED: 17TH MARCH, 2005 P. C.:- P. C.:- P. C.:- 1. Heard Mr. Pandey, the learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. By the impugned order the learned Judge of the City Civil Court has rejected the Chamber summons taken out for amendment in the L.C. Suit No. 5189 of 1998. 3. The Chamber Summons was taken out some times in Feb.2001 for amendment of the plaint which was filed in February, 1998 and the reason for taking out the Chamber Summons was purportedly to bring on record the subsequent events. The perusal of the Chamber (-2-) Summons indicates that there was no subsequent event after September, 1998 in respect of the suit property which was sought to be brought on record. The trial court has considered the averments made in the Chamber Summons as well as the arguments advanced by both the parties and the reasoning given in support of the order of rejection cannot be faulted with. No case is made out for calling any interference in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution. 4. The petition is, therefore, rejected summarily.