Allowed

Ravindra Thyampanna Shetty v. Merkala Thyampanna Shetty and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC23 Sept 2016CHS/270/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge order allows a chamber summons seekung substantial amendments to a plaint in Suit No. 791 of 2013. The court fixes deadlines for service and filing of additional documents and clarifies that the amendment does not relate back to the date of institution.

What did the court decide?

Amendment to plaint allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) with specified timelines for service and additional written statement; no relation back to date of institution.

Ravindra Thyampanna Shetty Vs Merkala… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

925-CHS270-16.DOC

¶2

SHEPHALI

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 270 OF 2016

¶4

IN

¶5

SUIT NO. 791 OF 2013

¶6

Ravindra Thyampanna Shetty…Plaintiff
Versus
Merkala Thyampanna Shetty & 2 Ors.…Defendants

¶7

Mr. Milind Jadhav, a/w Mr. Vijay S. Tiwari, i/b M/s. Bhandary &
Bhandary, for the Plaintiff/Applicant.
Mr. Sharan H. Jagtiani, i/b Yogendra M. Kanchan, for Defendants
Nos. 1 and 2.

¶8

CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J DATED: 23rd September 2016

¶9

PC:-

¶10

1. Heard.

¶11

2.The Chamber Summons seeks substantial amendments to the
Plaint. This is the second such Chamber Summons. A previous
Chamber Summons for similar amendments was allowed to be
withdrawn with liberty. There is an Affidavit in Reply. I have heard
both sides.

¶12

Page 1 of 2

¶13

23rd September 2016

¶14

925-CHS270-16.DOC

¶15

3.Although a Written Statement has been filed, I think it is
necessary to allow this Chamber Summons and I accordingly do so
in terms of prayer clause (a). The reason given in the Affidavit in
Support is that the proposed amendments include material that
subsequently came to the knowledge of the Plaintiffs. I will accept
this.

¶16

4.At the same time, it is necessary to make provision for the
Defendants who have already filed their Written Statements.
Accordingly, all rights and contentions of the Defendants are
expressly kept open, including, inter alia, as to the maintainability of
the newly added prayers, the question of limitation arising not only
on the unamended Plaint but also on the amended Plaint and the
question of whether, without an appropriate declaration as referred
to in paragraph 28, any of the reliefs now sought by amendment can
at all be granted.

¶17

5. It is also clarified that this amendment will not relate back to the date of institution of the Suit.

¶18

6.Amendment to be carried out on or before 14th October 2016.
A copy of the amended Plaint to be served on the Advocates for the
Defendants on or before 21st October 2016. Additional Written
Statement to be filed and served on or before 9th December 2016.

¶19

7. List the Suit for framing issues on 14th December 2016.

¶20

(G. S. PATEL, J.)

¶21

Page 2 of 2
23rd September 2016

Ravindra Thyampanna Shetty v. Merkala Thyampanna Shetty and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra Thyampanna Shetty v. Merkala Thyampanna Shetty and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rashtriya Metal Industries Ltd. Vs Rashtriya Metal Industries

Rashtriya Metal Industries Ltd. Vs Rashtriya Metal Industries

Wanbury Limited Vs Venberry Health Care Pvt. Ltd.

Larsen and Toubro Ltd. Vs Kantilal C. Kothari and Ors. . and Pls Technologies Private Limited (Applicant)

Bertil Benedict Sequeira Vs Bertram Walter Sequeira and 3 Ors.

Dhyaana Rajiv Samani Vs Satvik Rajiv Samani and 8 Ors.