1 MNM IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 590 OF 2010 IN SUIT NO. 808 OF 2004 Shantikumar D. Majithia & Ors. ...Plaintiffs Vs. Union of India & Ors. ...Defendants Mr. S.U. Kamdar, Sr. Counsel i/b. Kanga & Co., for Plaintiffs Mr. D.J. Khamb ata with Mr. S.R. Rajguru for Defendant No.1 Ms. Geeta Shashtri for Defendant Nos. 2 to 4 CORAM : SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED : 21ST JUNE, 2010 P.C. : 1. The Plaintiffs seek to amend the Suit which is filed on title upon certain orders passed, which are sought to be challenged. The challenge to these orders would be seen consequent upon the Plaintiffs making out its title. 2. The Plaintiffs filed a Writ Petition No.2650/2008 since the Plaintiffs’ title itself was in dispute. The Plaintiffs could not amend the Writ Petition and hence has been ordered to have his challenge met in this Suit on title consequent on amendment of the plaint. 2 3. Hence despite the argument on behalf of Defendants 2 to 4 and the proposed Respondent that it would change the nature of the Suit, the permission would be required to grant the Plaintiffs the necessary relief consequent upon the Plaintiffs’ title. Consequently the Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). 4. Plaintiffs shall amend the Suit within 2 weeks. 5. Plaintiffs shall also amend the copies of the plaint served upon the Defendants within 2 weeks. 6. Plaintiffs shall serve the amended copy of the plaint upon the Respondent’s Advocate within 2 weeks. 7. The Respondents waives service of the amended plaint. 8. The Chamber Summons is disposed off accordingly. (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J.)