(1.) The appellants are the defendants in O.S. No. 256 of 2008 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Kochi. The said suit was filed by the respondent herein, initially seeking a decree for specific performance of an agreement for sale dated 26.3.2007, directing the appellants to execute a sale deed in favour of the respondent in respect of the plaint schedule property, having an extent of 53 cents, comprised in survey Nos. 200/1 and 1511 of Edakochi Village and to put the respondent in possession of the same, with an alternate prayer for realisation of an amount of Rs. 1 Crore said to have been paid by the respondent to the appellants towards advance sale consideration together with interest @ 18% per annum and for a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the appellants from alienating or encumbering the plaint schedule property.
(2.) On receipt of summons, the appellants entered appearance and filed a written statement denying the allegations in the plaint and contending that, they had never agreed to sell the plaint schedule property to the respondent and that the respondent had never agreed to purchase the same. According to the appellants, the agreement dated 26.3.2007 happened to be signed as demanded by the respondent on the understanding that the respondent will provide an amount of Rs. 1 Crore to the second appellant for discharging his liability with the bank, but, the respondent did not pay any such amount to the second appellant. It was also contended that the respondent filed the suit in collusion with the tenants of the building situate in the plaint schedule property, against whom the second appellant had initiated eviction proceedings as R.C.P. No. 10 of 2009 before the Rent Control Court, Kochi.
(3.) The respondent filed I.A. No. 101 of 2011 seeking an amendment of the plaint in O.S. No. 256 of 2008 by deleting the prayer for specific performance and to convert the suit into one for realisation of the advance amount of Rs. 1 Crore with interest @ 18% per annum. The said interlocutory application was allowed and the plaint was amended accordingly.