kbp 1 1539-09.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1539 OF 2009 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO.362 OF 2003 Durgadas T. Mulchandani ..Plaintiff Vs. Samarth Securities Handling Systems Pvt. Ltd. ..Defendant ......... Ms.Kavita S. Lalwani, for plaintiff. Ms.Nita Solanki i/b.Kiran Jain & Co., for defendant. ......... CORAM : A.S.OKA, J.. DATE : 17th November, 2009. P.C. : 1] Heard learned counsel for the plaintiff in support of the chamber summons. I have also heard learned counsel for the defendant who is opposing the chamber summons. 2] The summary suit has been filed by the plaintiff for recovery of sum of Rs. 1,75,000/- with interest on the principal amount. The suit is based on bills of exchange. In the plaint, it is stated that the defendant has paid interest to the plaintiff upto 8th July, 2000. 3] By the present chamber summons, the plaintiff is seeking permission to amend the plaint by adding paragraph 3A. The plaintiff wants to contend that the interest upto 8th July, 2000 was paid by the defendant by two cheques dated 29th September, 2000 in the sum of Rs.16,398/- and Rs.5,430/-, respectively. A reliance is sought to be placed on pay-in-slip dated 29th September, 2000 by which the said cheques were deposited by the plaintiff. Paragraph 3B is sought to be added for contending that the said amounts were credited to the account of kbp 2 1539-09.sxw the plaintiff and the amounts were also entered in the books on account of the plaintiff. 4] The opposition to the chamber summons is on the ground that in the suit of the year 2003 an amendment is sought to be made in the year 2009 and there is no explaination whatsoever for the gross delay. The learned counsel for the defendant pointed out that a summons for judgment was taken out in the year 2003 which was withdrawn. She, therefore, submitted that the amendment cannot be allowed. 5] I have given careful consideration to the submissions. There is a pleading in the plaint that the defendant has paid interest upto 8th July, 2000. By the proposed amendment, the plaintiff wants to give details regarding the manner in which the interest amount has been paid. Therefore, the amendment is explainatory in nature and no new case is sought to be made out. Notwithstanding the grant of amendment, the issue regarding bar of limitation always remains open which can be agitated by the defendant at an appropriate stage. 6] Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Amendment be carried out within six weeks. ( A.S.OKA, J. )