1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.217 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO.1218 OF 2006 Lilaram Ladharam Lalwani ...Plaintiff. Vs. Kishinchand Lilaram Lalwani & Ors. ...Defendants. Ms. K.C.Nichani, Advocate for the Plaintiff. Mr.V.M.Talreja, Advocate for Defendant No.4. Ms.Aditi Chavan i/by M/s. Ashwin Ankhad & Associates for Defendant No.3. CORAM :- ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED :- 8TH JUNE, 2009. P.C.- 1. The Plaintiff has taken out this Chamber Summons for amendment again though initially when the suit was filed in City Civil Court before it got transfer to High Court, a prayer for declaration as sought in the present Chamber Summons was deleted at the objection stage of the suit. Now, the submission and prayer is made based upon the averments already made in the plaint for an appropriate declaration that the suit premises is the property of plaintiff’s Hindu 2 Undivided Family (HUF) and Defendant No.1, who is son of Plaintiff is co-pacener of the said HUF. 2. In a suit like this, where the dispute is about the status of property where it is HUF or individual, it is desirable that all the averments and prayers are made at earliest for the proper adjudication, so that appropriate order or relief can be granted by the Court. 3. Admittedly, the trial is not yet begin. Issues are not yet framed. The suit is of the year 2006, therefore, at this stage I am inclined to grant this amendment/ Chamber summons to give full opportunity to both the parties to prove their respective case and claims. However, it is made clear that all defences as available under the law are kept open. 4. In view of above, the Chamber Summons is allowed. The Plaintiff to carry out the amendment within a period of two weeks. The liberty is granted to defend and/or to file reply/defence. No order as to costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)