rng IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER CHAMBER CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1385 OF 2008 SUMMONS NO.1385 OF 2008 SUMMONS NO.1385 OF 2008 in in in SUIT SUIT SUIT NO.2204 OF 2008 NO.2204 OF 2008 NO.2204 OF 2008 Suraj Jagtiani ... Plaintiff Vs. Regency Hotels Pvt Ltd & anr. Defendants Mr.Zal Andhyarujina i.b I.R.Joshi & Co for Plaintiff Mr.Shiraz Pestomjee i.b Chitnis & Co for Defendant no.1 Mr.D.B.Shroff Sr.Counsel ib Vikram Singh Yadav for Defendant no.2 CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S.OKA, J : A.S.OKA, J : A.S.OKA, J DATE DATE DATE : 20TH : 20TH : 20TH OCTOBER, 2008 OCTOBER, 2008 OCTOBER, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for for the plaintiff in support of the Chamber Summons and the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd defendant in support of the Chamber Summons. Learned counsel for the 2nd defendant has opposed the Chamber Summons. 2. Prayer in the Chamber Summons is essentially for deleting the 2nd defendnt and for carrying out the consequential amendments. 3. The opposition of the learned counsel 2 appearing for the 2nd defendant is on two grounds. He pointed out the item nos. 4 and 16 of the schedule to the Chamber summons. He submitted that there are admissions in the plaint of the plaintiff that the 2nd defendant is a necessary party to the suit. He submitted that the plaintiff cannot be permitted to withdraw the said admission. He also invited my attention to clause 12 of the schedule to the Chamber Summons and submitted that if the plaintiff wants to substitute the word "defendant’ in clause (f) in para 23 of the plaint by the word " defendants" the plaintiff ought to have done the same in case of other relevant paragraphs of the plaint. The learned counsel appearing for the 1st defendant has adopted submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd defendant. 4. Essentially, the amendment which is sought by the Chamber summons is of the deletion of the 2nd defendant. It is obvious that deletion of the 2nd defendant by the plaintiff is at his own risk as to its consequences. Therefore, even if the amendment is allowed it will be always open for the first defendant to contend that the 2nd defendant was a necessary and/or proper party to 3 the suit. 5. Subject to what is observed above, the Chamber Summons deserves to be made absolute. Accordingly, the Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). Amendment to be carried out within four weeks. 6. It is made clear that notwithstanding the fact that the Chamber Summons is made absolute it will be open for the 1st defendant to raise a contention that the 2nd defendant was a necessary and proper party to the suit. It is also made clear that deletion of the 2nd defendant will be at the risk of the plaintiff. { A.S.Oka, J } A.S.Oka, J } A.S.Oka, J }