1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY Original Side Chamber Summons No.1301 of 2006 In Suit No.1351 of 2000 S.P.Capital Financing Ltd. Plaintiff Vs. Simplex Enterprises and ors. Defendants And Nisha Jhaveri & anr. Respondents Mr.Pankaj Shah for plaintiff. Mr.Amit Sheth for deft.nos.1 & 2. CORAM: R.M.SAVANT,J. November 24, 2008. P.C. . In the above Chamber Summons the applicant i.e. the original plaintiff prays for being allowed to amend the plaint as per the Schedule annexed to the Chamber Summons. The said amendment sought is on account of the order dated 20th November 2002 passed in Summons for Judgment No.1115 of 2000 as also the order dated 9th June 2003 passed in Appeal No.197 of 2003. The amendment sought is based on the said two orders. In so far as the order dated 20th November 2002 is concerned, in terms of clause (i) of the said order, the defendants were directed to deposit an amount of Rs.30,000,00/- (Rupees thirty lakhs) within 2 six months from date and in terms of clause (vi) of the said order in case of default the summons for judgment was to stand granted and the suit was to stand decreed in terms of the prayer clauses of the plaint. . The said order of the learned Single Judge was modified in appeal by the Division Bench by order dated 9th June 2003 by recording that in the event the said amount of Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees thirty lakhs) is not deposited as directed, the Summons for Judgment shall stand granted and the suit shall stand decreed in the sum of Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees thirty lakhs) with interest as prayed for from the date of the institution till realisation. Defendants were, however, granted unconditional leave to defend the suit in respect of the rest of the claim. . It is an undisputed position that the defendants have not deposited the said amount of Rs.30,00,000/- and, therefore, in terms of the order passed in the appeal, the suit has been decreed to the extent of Rs.30 lakhs with applicable interest. The plaintiffs, therefore, want to restrict the claim in the suit to Rs.1,27,80,000/- (Rupees one crore twenty 3 seven lakhs eighty thousand) from Rs.1,57,80,000/- (Rupees one crore fifty seven lakhs eighty thousand). It appears that the plaintiff filed execution proceedings which had come up before a learned Single Judge of this Court when a statement came to be made that the defendant no.1 has deposited a sum of Rs.15,95,000/- (Rupees fifteen lakhs ninety five thousand) and credit for the same should be given by the plaintiffs upon which the learned counsel for the plaintiffs made a statement that due credit would be given for the amount so deposited. . The learned counsel for the defendants states that the amount of Rs.30,00,000/- should, therefore, be appropriated against the principal amount which according to him is to the tune of Rs.90,00,000/- (Rupees ninety lakhs). The said contention of the defendants is opposed by the learned counsel for the plaintiffs stating that both, the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench did not provide for adjusting the said Rs.30 lakhs against the principal amount. . Be that as it may, in view of the order dated 20th November 2002 passed by the learned Single Judge and the order dated 9th June 2003 passed by the 4 Division Bench in the appeal, the Chamber Summons is required to be allowed and is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). It is made clear that the contention urged on behalf of the defendants that the said amount of Rs.30 lakhs should be adjusted against the principal amount has not been dealt with and it would be open for the defendants to urge the said contention when the occasion so arises. The Chamber Summons is accordingly disposed of. Amendment to be carried out within four weeks from date. Amended copy of the plaint to be served on the concerned parties within two weeks thereafter.