- 1 - 6.chs.1004.11 s.123.11 skt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1004 OF 2011 IN SUIT NO. 123 OF 2011 Swaraj Deveopers ..Plaintiff -Versus- Mr.Waman Ramechandra Madaye ..Defendant -And- M/s.Swaraj Associates & Anr. ..Respondents .......... Ms.Bharati Bheda i/b S.Ashwinikumar & Co. for the Plaintiff. Mr.Ram Ugrah Singh for the Defendant. Mr.I.M.Vohra i/b Sanjeev Singh for Respondent No.2. .......... CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 20TH JULY 2011. P.C. 1 The amendments sought are only for the purpose for brining on record the facts regarding the termination of the suit agreement and the purported alienation of the suit property in favour of the proposed defendants. - 2 - 6.chs.1004.11 s.123.11 2 In the circumstances, I did not grant the defendants an adjournment to file an affidavit-in-reply. The contentions on merits are always open between the parties. The order does not reflect upon the merits of the rival contentions. 3 In these circumstance, the Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer (a). Amendment to be carried out within four weeks from today. 4 It is clarified that the similar and consequential amendments are also permitted to the Notice of Motion as per the Schedule marked as Exhibit “A” to the plaint. This order shall be without prejudice to the pending interlocutory proceedings and interlocutory orders. -