1 rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 45 OF 2010 ALONGWITH CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 46 OF 2010 ALONGWITH CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 47 OF 2010 Sau. Anita Rajesh Kelhe .. Applicant V/s. Shri Parasmal Motilal Bafna .. Respondent Mr. M. S. Karnik for the Applicant in all Applications. Mr. N. R. Bubna for the Respondent in all the Applications. CORAM : J. H. BHATIA, J. DATE : MARCH 22ND, 2010. P.C. : Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The Revision Applicants, who are the Defendants in the Summary Suits, had raised a question of tenability of the suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure mainly on the ground that the claim amount also included interest at 2 the rate of Rs. 18 % per annum about which there were no written agreement between the parties. The contentions was rejected by the Trial Court. However, after some discussion at the bar, the learned counsel for the Plaintiff/Respondent makes a statement that the Plaintiff/Respondent shall make amendment in the plaint deleting the amount of interest and restricting the claim only to the principal amount, and then would add a prayer for interest which may be awarded by the Court, as per the Interest Act. 3. The Respondent/Plaintiff shall be allowed to make amendments, if such Application is made. 4. In view of this statement, nothing remains in the present Civil Revision Applications and the said Applications stand disposed of. (J. H. BHATIA, J.) 3