1 acd IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1647 OF 2009 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 336 OF 2009 Ahmed M. Rowjee ...Plaintiff. Vs. Sadruddin Hasa N Daya & Ors. ....Defendants. --- Mr. Ahmed Rojee, Plaintiff present in person. Mr. Chetan Kapadia i/b M/s Nankani & Associates, for Defendant Nos.1 to 3. ---- CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : 20th NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C.: 1. Heard the party in person (Plaintiff), and Shri Kapadia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of defendant nos.1 to 3. 2. Perused the Chamber Summons and the affidavit-in-support. Prima facie, there may be some substance in the objections of the defendants that the claim now sought to be included and added is barred by limitation. But, that is no impediment in law to disallow amendment, more particularly court can keep open all objections including the bar of limitation for being urged at an appropriate stage. 3. Thus, keeping open all the objections including that the claim of plaintiff is barred by limitation, the amendment is allowed. The Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Amendment to be 2 carried out within two weeks. 4. Needless to state that all amendments being permitted does not mean that at this stage itself the court is granting any relief. Therefore, apprehension that the plaintiff may claim refund of court fees on the basis of this order is not well founded. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)