1 srk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.239 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO. 857 OF 2006 M/s Selvet Publicity & Consultants Pvt. Ltd. … Plaintiff. Versus M/s Nutan Advertising Agency Pvt. Ltd. … Defendant. Dr. Birendra Saraf with Ms. Neeta Solanki i/b M/s. Kiran Jain & Co. Advocates for the plaintiff. Mr.H.V. Chande, Advocate for the defendant. CORAM: R. G. KETKAR, J. DATED: 25th September, 2009. P.C. 1 The plaintiffs have taken out this Chamber Summons praying for amendment to the plaint in terms of the proposed amendment set out in schedule annexed to the Chamber Summons. In support of this Chamber Summons, Shri Hemant Desai, Accounts Manager of the plaintiffs has made an affidavit, dated 6th February, 2008. The plaintiffs propose to rely upon invoices at Exhibits B-1 to B-34; correspondence exchanged between the parties as also plaintiffs intend to add certain averments in paragraph 12 of the suit. 2 2 In support of this Chamber Summons, Dr. Birendra Saraf, learned counsel for the plaintiffs submitted that the plaintiffs intend to give better and further particulars in the plaint. Initially, the plaintiffs took out Summons for Judgment and after hearing parties, the Summons for Judgment was allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to take out Summons for Judgment after amending the plaint. In the present case, as per the provisions of Order VI of Rule 17 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the trial is yet to commence. The present amendment does not alter the nature of the suit. 3 On the other hand, Shri Chande, learned counsel for the defendants submitted that by the proposed amendment the plaintiffs are altering the cause of action. The claim is barred by limitation. The plaintiffs also intend to bring the suit within limitation. He further submitted that, plaintiffs can very well produce these documents at the time of evidence and for that purpose they need not amend the plaint. 4 Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, in my opinion, the proposed amendment does not alter the nature of the suit. The suit remains one and same. By the proposed amendment, the plaintiffs intend to bring on 3 record the better and further particulars in support of their claim. Having regard to the provisions of Order VI Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, the trial is yet to commence. In my opinion, the proposed amendment is absolutely necessary for determining the controversy between the parties. 5 In so far as the grievance of the defendants that the plaintiffs, by the proposed amendment intend to bring time barred claim within limitation is concerned, that can be taken care of by keeping the issue of limitation open. In view of this, the Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) and (b) with no orders as to costs. 6 The Plaintiffs are directed to carry out amendment in the plaint within six weeks and furnish the copy of the amended plaint to the defendants within two weeks thereafter. It is expressly made clear that the issue of limitation is kept open. (R.G. KETKAR, J)