1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORIDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 645 OF 2007 IN SUIT NO. 1313 OF 1995 Shekhar Bajaj & ors ........Plaintiffs versus The Bank of Karad Ltd. & ors........Defendants. Ms. Deepti Panda i/b. Dhru & Co. adv. for the Plaintiffs Mr. S.V. Chanbal adv. for the Defendant no.1 Mr. Irine D’lima i/b. D’lima & Asso. For defendant no.2. CORAM: A. P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 4th MAY, 2009. P.C.: 1. The plaintiffs were the trustees at the time of filing of the suit of one Bajaj International Provident Fund Institution, a duly recognized Provident Fund Institution under the Income Tax Act. The plaintiff no.2 was the trustee. By the present Chamber Summons the plaintiff seeks to delete the name of the plaintiff no.2 B.K.Desai and in his place want to substitute the name of respondent no.1 Sanjivnayan Bajaj. The plaintiff no.4 has resigned from the trusteeship and hence the plaintiff also wants to delete the name of plaintiff no.4 and at his place substitute the name of respondent no.2 by name Vishal Nangalia and he has been appointed in place of plaintiff no.2. The application is 2 opposed on the ground that there is delay in filing the chamber summons. It is then submitted by the learned counsel for the defendant no.1 so also defendant no.2 that in case the delay is to be condoned, the same should be subject to payment of costs. Having regard to the nature of the controversy, I deem it appropriate to condone the delay and allow the chamber summons. In the result the chamber summons is allowed and made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) and (b), however subject to payment of costs of Rs. 5,000/- to the defendant no.1 and defendant no.2 each by the plaintiff. (A. P. DESHPANDE, J.)