JUDGMENT : I.A. No. 6 in O.S. No. 2/1988 1. The plaintiff has filed this application for amendment of the plaint. Learned counsel for defendants take notice of the application and are granted four weeks' time to file objections, if any. 2. On 18th July, 2000, keeping in view the nature of controversy/dispute between the parties, we had requested the learned Attorney General to assist the Court. Mr. Soli, J. Sorabjee, learned Attorney General is present. 3. The learned Attorney General has suggested that keeping in view that the dispute is regarding boundaries between the States, which are a part of the Union, it may be appropriate, for amicable settlement of the dispute/controversies that the same are referred to a Boundary Commission, to be appointed for the purpose and that the party States can deliberate on the terms of Reference to the Commission as also about the composition of the Commission. It is suggested that in that event, the suits may be withdrawn from the Court so that the Boundary Commission, as and when constituted, is in a position to deal with the matters without any constraints. 4. Mr. K.K. Venugopal, learned senior counsel, appearing for the plaintiff, submits that though in principle there cannot be any objection to the appointment of a Boundary Commission for settlement of the disputes between the States, he would like to seek instructions from the plaintiff and report on the next date. 5. Mr. Kailash Vasudev, learned senior counsel submits that he shall also seek instructions from defendant No. 3, in the meanwhile. 6. List the matter after five weeks for directions. O.S. No. 1/1989 7. List after five weeks along with O.S. No. 2/1988. Order accordingly.