ILAM CHAND Vs. MAM CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Harsh Narain Sharma, learned counsel for the revisionists. None appeared for the opposite party (defendant).

(2.) Revisionists filed Suit No. 2 of 1981 for specific performance of the contract on the basis of an alleged agreement to sell certain plots of land for a sum of Rs. 66,000. During the pendency of the suit, the defendant-opposite party moved an application for amendment of the written statement which was allowed. The defendant had taken a plea that the plots of land in respect of which there was an agreement to sell between the parties had been allotted to some other person during consolidation proceedings and, therefore, no decree for specific performance of contract could be passed. After such amendment was carried out in the written statement, the revisionists-plaintiffs moved application for amendment of the plaint as contained in Annexure-1 to the affidavit filed with the present revision application. In the amendment application, the revisionists alleged that the defendant has amended his written statement taking up plea that during consolidation proceedings the plots mentioned in the disputed agreement to sell have been allotted to some other person and in its place defendant has been allotted new plots. Therefore, in respect of the plots mentioned in the agreement to sell, no decree for specific performance could be passed. It was also stated in the amendment application that the plaintiffs had been advised that the plaintiffs, in the alternative, can claim a decree for sale of the newly allotted plots of land to the defendant. Therefore, the proposed amendments have become necessary. By the proposed amendments, the plaintiffs wanted to add para 7/A in the plaint wherein they stated that during the pendency of the suit. In order to frustrate the suit of the plaintiffs, the defendant in collusion with the consolidation authorities/officials and also in collusion with his wife, Smt. Raja Del, got the entire plots of land mentioned in the agreement to sell transferred to the chak of Smt. Raja Del. the wife of the defendant and also got his new chak created out of the plots originally existing in the name of Smt. Raja Del although the defendant is still in possession of the disputed plots of land. The defendant, therefore, cannot take advantage of this situation. It was also stated that such an objection was taken by the plaintiffs before the consolidation court and an appeal Babu Ram v. Raja Dei, being Appeal No. 358 is pending for disposal. Another para 7B was proposed to be added by the said amendment stating therein the new numbers of the plots allotted to the defendant during the consolidation "proceedings and further alleging that the plaintiffs were ready to purchase these plots of land for the same amount viz., Rs. 66,000 and that there was no legal obstacle in passing a decree for specific performance with regard to these plots of land. In the prayer clause, the plaintiffs proposed to add relief (B) being consequential or alternate relief in view of the amendments as contained in newly added paras 7A and 7B in the plaint.

(3.) The defendant-opposite party filed objections as contained in Annexure-2 to the affidavit wherein he contested the amendment application on the ground that by proposed amendments the nature of the suit shall be changed and that there was no agreement to sell in respect of the newly allotted plots to the defendant and in respect of them no suit was maintainable.