Heard learned counsel for the applicants (defendant nos.1, 2 4 and 5) and the plaintiffs. Other defendants are absent when called.

2. This chamber summons has been taken out by defendant Nos.1,2, 4 and 5 (hereinafer referred to as "the defendants") for amendment of the written statement. The chamber summons is seriously opposed by the plaintiffs interalia on the grounds that the chamber summons is barred by limitation as it is made beyond the period prescribed by Article 137 of the Limitation Act and that the chamber summons is not bonafide and has been taken out only for the purpose of delaying the trial. The written statement was filed on 20 November 2006 and the suit was posted for framing of issues in December 2009. After the draft issues were tendered, apprehending that the issues would be framed and the trial would begin, the defendants have taken out this chamber summons for delaying the trial and denying the plaintiff no.1 who is a senior citizen, the fruits of the litigation. Counsel for the plaintiffs further submits that amendment is not at all necessary for deciding the real issues in controversy between the parties and therefore, the chamber summons should be