*1* CHS-1137-10.sxw Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1137 OF 2010 IN SUIT NO.3400 OF 2006 Jagdish H. Sharma ... Plaintiff V/s. Kanhaiyalal Nathulal Joshi ... Defendant Mr. A.C. Singh, i/b. Mr. D.R. Shah, for the Plaintiff. Mr. Owen Menezes, i/b. Mr. R.S. Tripathi, for the Defendant. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 28 th November, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Singh, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Plaintiff, and Mr. Menezes, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Defendant. 2. Perused the affidavit-in-support and the affidavit filed in reply. 3. This Chamber Summons for amendment seeks to add a prayer clause seeking permanent injunction in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant. It is stated that the averments to support that relief is already made in the plaint, but, by inadvertence and mistake, the prayer was not incorporated. Therefore, the prayer may be allowed to be incorporated as that by itself will not cause any prejudice and particularly *2* CHS-1137-10.sxw when the nature of the Suit and the cause of action has not undergone any change or alteration. 4. On the other hand, it is argued that the Plaintiff relies upon an Agreement of 2002. The Suit is filed in the year 2006 and the application for amendment is made in the year 2010. In such circumstances, if this application is allowed, that would prejudice the Defendant and a valuable plea of limitation in defence would be lost. Mr. Menezes submitted that it is well settled that any amendment which destroys or takes away a valuable defence should not be permitted. 5. I have perused the Chamber Summons and affidavits on record with the assistance of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties. I am satisfied that the request, as made by the Plaintiff, deserves to be allowed. The apprehension of the Defendant that the claim is time barred and, therefore, the plea in that behalf would be completely lost and amendment sought is without any basis, it can always be clarified that any amendment of the nature claimed and granted would not by itself mean that the Court has expressed any opinion on the claim of the Plaintiff being within limitation or barred by it. By keeping open the objection of limitation and subject to the ground of limitation being raised in arguments, in my opinion, this Chamber Summons can be granted. Additionally, I have satisfied that the amendment is only to incorporate a prayer seeking permanent injunction, the averments in relation to which have been already made. Therefore, by merely permitting the amendment, it does not mean that the Court has opined on the merits of the amended pleas. *3* CHS-1137-10.sxw 6. With all these clarifications, this Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Amendment be carried out within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Amended plaint be served within two weeks thereafter. 7. There shall be no order as to costs. (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.)