IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.600 OF 2008 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO.477 OF 2008 M/s.Monito Enterprises .. Plaintiffs Versus M/s.Union of India & Ors. .. Defendants Mr.H.R.Shetty i/by H.R.Shetty & Co for the plaintiffs. Ms.Sheetal Mhatre i/by M.V.Kini & Co for the defendant no.2. Mr.G.N.Srinivasan a/w Mr.G.Hariharan i/by H.d.Rathod for defendant nos.1, 4 and 5. CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 03rd December 2008. : 03rd December 2008. : 03rd December 2008. P.C.: . Heard the learned counsel appearing for 1st, 4th and 5th defendants in support of the chamber summons. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiffs who has opposed the chamber summons. The prayer in the chamber summons is for condonation of delay of 27 days in entering appearance in the suit. The chamber summons is opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiffs by contending that there is 2 no explanation for delay of 27 days and therefore no case is made out for condonation of delay. After having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, I find that in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the affidavit in support of the chamber summons, there is adequate explanation for the delay. Hence, a case is made out for condonation of delay. Chamber summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). The 1st, 4th and 5th defendants are directed to pay costs of Rs.2,500/- to the plaintiffs within a period of four weeks from today. (A.S.Oka,J)