1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1306 OF 2009 in NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3557 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO. 2940 OF 2008 Manoj Omprakash Suri & Ors. ....Plaintiffs Versus The Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority, Mumbai & Ors. ....Defendants Mr. Shailesh Shah i/b. M/s. S. Ashwinikumar & Co., Advocates for the Plaintiffs. Mr. G. W. Mattos, AGP for Defendant No.1. Mr. B. M. Malcolm, Advocate for Defendant No.2. CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. DATE : 2ND FEBRUARY, 2010. P.C. : Heard learned Counsel for the Plaintiffs and Defendants. 2. The above chamber summons is taken out by the Plaintiffs for amending the plaint in terms of schedule annexed to the chamber summons. By proposed amendment, the Plaintiffs seeks to bring on record subsequent events and also pleads waiver of the notice under section 173 of MHADA. It is a settled law that merits of the amendment cannot be gone into and the averments are required to be proved independently. The proposed amendment is not contrary 2 to the original plaint. In that view of the matter, the chamber summons is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). 3. Necessary amendment be carried out by the Plaintiffs within a period of two weeks from today and amended copy of the plaint be served on the Defendants within further period of two weeks. 4. Needless to mention that the Defendants’ right to challenge the contentions in proposed amendment on merit is kept open. Sd/- (R. V. MORE, J.)