C K PHILIPS Vs. T A SHANMUGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is the plaintiff who filed the suit for specific performance of the contract of same in respect of the agreement executed by the defendant and the said suit was decreed on 29.1.1986. Pursuant to the sale, the plaintiff applied for execution in E.P.No.293/1986 and the Executing Court also ordered, execution of the sale deed. The petitioner/plaintiff furnished necessary stamp papers for the execution of the sale deed and the sale deed was also presented before the Sub-Registrar Office at Ambathur by the concerned clerk of the Court on 20.7.1993. At that time, it was found that the survey number furnished was the survey number of the village and the correct survey number is that 204/1C1B4. Thereafter, the plaintiff verified the revenue records and found, what was given in the plaint was only the village survey number and the correct survey number is 204/1C1B4. Immediately, the plaintiff filed an application for amendment under Order 6 Rule 17 and also under Section 15 C.P.C. permitting him to carry out the amendment. The said petition was resisted by the respondent/defendant making general denial as stated in the averments in the affidavit. Ultimately, the petition came to be dismissed on 12.1.1996. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred this revision petition.

(2.) Heard, learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondents.

(3.) It appears that the plaint was filed mentioning the Survey Number as 89 and apart from the survey number, the plaintiff has furnished the measurements of the suit property and also the boundaries. The plaintiff came to know that the survey number furnished in the plaint is not correct only at the time when the sale deed was presented through Court before the Sub-Registrar Office. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that when the petitioner came to know that the survey number furnished in the plaint was the survey number of the village, immediately he has taken steps to amend the plaint.