1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 926 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO. 1759 OF 2000 M/s.Tata Chemicals Ltd. & Anr. ...Plaintiffs vs. M/s.N.S. Guzder & Co.Ltd. & Anr. ...Defendants Mr.S.P. Kanuga i/b. Ms.P.N. Sadarangi for the Plaintiffs. Mr.Shailesh Mendon with Ms.Preeti Singh i/b. M/s.A. Mehta Laljee & Co. for Defendant No.2. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : JULY 20, 2009 P.C. :- 1 Heard Counsel for the plaintiffs and Counsel for the defendants. 2 This Chamber Summons is taken out by the plaintiffs for amendment of the plaint. 3 It is submitted that though material facts 2 were pleaded, material particulars were not given in the plaint itself. It is submitted that these facts are based on the correspondence between the parties, therefore, this chamber summons is taken out for the purpose of amendment of the plaint. 4 The learned Counsel for defendant no.2 submits that there is a gross delay in filing this chamber summons for amendment of the plaint. It is submitted that all these facts were known to the plaintiffs and there is no reason why the said amendment should be allowed at such a belated stage. 5 It is no doubt true that a suit was filed in 2008 and the chamber summons has been filed in 2009 for the amendment of the plaint. However, after going through the averments in the plaint, it thus appears that the material facts were pleaded in the plaint and the particulars are sought to be brought in through this amendment. In the interest of justice, therefore, it would be appropriate to allow 3 the amendment. 6 Chamber Summons, therefore, is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Amendment to be carried out within four weeks. (V.M. KANADE, J.)