- 1 - rng IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1345 OF 2008 in SUIT NO.1763 OF 2008 Mr.Manohar Anna More .. Plaintiff vs Mr.Ravikant Chandrakant More & ors.. Defendants .. Mr.Rahul Chitnis a/w Mr.Tejas Joshi i.b M/s Shaunak Satpute & Co for Plaintiff Ms.Dipali Lomte i.b Ms Divya Sanghavi for Defendants CORAM: R.V.MORE,J DATED: November 9, 2009 P.C. 1. Mr.Chitnis learned counsel for the plaintiff makes a statement that the defendant nos. 2 and 3 are served and an affidavit to that effect has already been filed. Ms.Lomte is appearing for the defendant no.1. This Chamber Summons is taken out for permission to the plaintiff to delete one sentence on page 14 para 38 line 17 in plaint namely that “ The Plaintiff submits that this Hon’ble court be pleased to order and direct the defendants to quit, vacate and hand over to the plaintff, quiet vacant and peaceful possession of the said property” and for deleting prayer (d) in the plaint. It is the specific case of the plaintiff that they are in possession of the suit property. The pleadings are - 2 - already there to that effect. However, inadvertently the sentence mentioned above and prayer clause (d) was inserted. Learned counsel for the defendants has no objection if the Chamber summons is allowed to that extent. None appears for defendant nos. 2 and 3 inspite of service. In the absence of any contest to the Chamber Summons, the defendant nos.2 and 3 deemed to have admitted the reasons given in the affidavit in support Chamber Summons is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Necessary amendment be carried out within a period of two weeks from today. The amended copy be served on the defendants within a period of further two weeks. The plaintiff shall communicate this order to the defendant nos. 2 and 3 accordingly. R.V.More, J - 3 -