IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1640 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO.2013 OF 1992 Manmohan D. Ladha & Anr. ..... Plaintiffs V/s. Ms.Sitadevi Satyapal Gupta .... Defendant Mr.Dhaval Kevi i/by Law Charter, for the plaintiffs. Mr.J.P.Sen i/by K.P.Jain, for the defendant. CORAM: R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED: 12th JANUARY, 2009. P.C. 1. This chamber summons for amendment of the plaint and in particular to add averments and prayer as regards the damages which are being claimed by the plaintifs, which were not claimed at the time of institution of the suit in the year 1992. 2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the plaintiffs and defendant. The learned counsel for the defendant contended that if the amendment is granted, it would be beyond the period of limitation and hence, it cannot be granted. It was also contended that at the time of filing of the suit, leave under Order 2 Rule 2 of CPC was not taken. According to him, on these two grounds, the prayer for amendment should be rejected. 3. In my view, the question of application of provisions of Order 2 of Rule 2 of CPC would not be applicable in the facts & circumstances of the case, keeping in view the provisions of Section 21 of the Specific Relief Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). In so far as the question of grant of chamber summons which may include the claim beyond the period of limitation, it was sought to be contended that proviso to sub-section 5 of Section 21 is regulated by other provisions of law i.e. Law relating to limitation and therefore, the amendment could not be granted. In my view, considering the language of proviso to sub-Section 5 which used the term 'at any stage of the proceedings', would explicitly goes to show that the Court has discretion to grant prayer for amendment of the plaint. In my view, the proviso to sub-Section 5 of Section 21 of the Act, permits amendment to include prayer for damages at any stage of proceedings and that point is to be held in favour of the plaintiff, who has come out with a prayer for amendment and asked for damages during the pendency of suit. The stand taken by the defendant cannot be accepted and the amendment is required to be granted to enable the plaintiff to put the case in a proper perspective. The defendant would get an opportunity to file additional written statement with regard to the amended plaint. Hence, the following order. :ORDER : 1. The chamber summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). 2. There shall be no order as to costs. 3. Plaintiffs to carry out amendment on or before 23-01-2009. 4. Plaintiffs to serve amended copy of the plaint upon the defendant on or before 29-01-2009. 5. Suit set down for directions on 02-02-2009. 4. After the aforesaid order is passed, the learned counsel for the defendant stated that the defendant intends to challenge this order and therefore, the order may be stayed. In my view, there is no need to stay the operation of this order. The copy would be available to the defendant immediately. ( R.Y.Ganoo, J. )