IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 884 OF 2007 CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 884 OF 2007 CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 884 OF 2007 IN IN IN SUIT NO. 217 OF 1981 SUIT NO. 217 OF 1981 SUIT NO. 217 OF 1981 Mr.Oommen Michael & Ors. ...Plaintiffs vs. Shri Gayatriprasad Ramnaresh Pandey & Ors..Defendants and The Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.A.G. Damle i/b. M/s.Subhash Pradhan & Co. for Plaintiffs and Applicants in Chamber Summons. Mr.M.V. Pandey for Defendant Nos.1 to 3. Mr.A.S. Rai for Defendant Nos.7, 8 and 9. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : JULY 31, 2008 DATED : JULY 31, 2008 DATED : JULY 31, 2008 P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the plaintiffs and the learned Counsel for the defendants. 2. This Chamber Summons is taken out by the plaintiffs for amendment of the plaint for bringing on record the subsequent events and for seeking additional prayers. It is submitted that after the interim order was passed, subsequent events have taken place in 2003, 2004 wherein unauthorised structure was constructed on the said suit plot of land and therefore, it is - 2 - necessary to bring on record these subsequent events. 3. The learned Counsel for the defendants, on the other hand, submits that a suit has been settled four years ago and this is an attempt to protract the proceedings. It is further submitted that nature of amendment changes cause of action of the suit. 4. I have perused the schedule of draft amendment annexed to the chamber summons. There is gross delay, first of all, in taking out chamber summons. The events which are mentioned in the said schedule have taken place in 2003 and 2004. In any event, the suit has been filed by the plaintiffs for Specific Performance of an Agreement of Sale dated 24th February, 1971 in respect of land bearing Survey No.84, Hissa No.1, City Survey No.1505 situated at Chembur. The plaintiffs can always bring on record these subsequent events if they are relating to the main cause of action in the suit by pleading evidence to that effect. In the present case, in my view, the subsequent events are beyond the preview of the suit filed by the plaintiffs for Specific - 3 - Performance of the agreement. The suit is pending since 1981. Issues have already been framed four years ago. This is obvious an attempt to protract the proceedings. Chamber Summons is dismissed. 5. Place the suit for direction after two weeks. Plaintiffs to serve the writ of summons on the added defendant within four weeks. Time to carry out amendment is extended by one week only. (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)