1 app571.11.sxw ssm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO. 571 OF 2011 IN CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1012 OF 2010 IN SUIT NO. 1159 OF 2006 Mr. Kamalbir Singh ....Appellant Vs. Maharani Nirmalkumari Chauhan & Ors. ...Respondents. Mr. Aspi Chinoy, Sr. Advocate a/w Ms. Soma Singh, Mr. Mahesh Londhe i/by M/s. Sanjay Udeshi & Co. for the Appellant. Mr. D.D. Madon, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rahul Naricharia and Mr. Astad Raderia i/by M/s. Mulla & Mulla and CBC for Respondent Nos. 5 and 6. CORAM :- D.K DESHMUKH AND ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATE :- 29 AUGUST 2011. P.C. :- In this Appeal, the Defendant challenges the order passed by the learned Single Judge allowing the Plaintiffs to amend the Plaint by his order dated 10 August, 2010. 2 app571.11.sxw ssm 2 The principal reason for challenging part of the amendment is that by the amendment, specific performance of the MOU at Exhibit J is sought. It is the contention of the Appellant-Defendant that on the date on which this amendment was sought that relief was barred by the law of limitation. The learned counsel appearing for the Plaintiffs submits that the question whether the date on which amendment referred to above namely seeking a decree of specific performance of the MOU at Exhibit J is barred by the limitation on the date on which the application was filed for amendment was barred by the limitation or not is kept open and that objection can be raised in its written statement and the issue on that can be framed and decided. It is obvious from this that while allowing the amendment, the learned Single Judge has not decided the question whether on the date on which application for amendment in the Plaint was made, the relief that was sought to be added by amendment in the Plaint was barred by the law of limitation or not. Therefore, the question whether on the date on which application for amendment was made, the Plaintiffs could have claimed that relief considering the period of limitation has been kept open and therefore that question can be raised and decided in the Civil Suit. 3 In this view of the matter therefore, in our opinion, Appeal need not be entertained, the same is disposed of. 3 app571.11.sxw ssm 4 The Defendant shall either amend their written statement if it is already filed or permitted to file additional written statement within a period of two weeks from today. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.)