RAJU Vs. YUSUFBHAI FAKIR MOHAMAD BAGWAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of parties taken up for final hearing.

(2.) The present respondent/original plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of contract purportedly on the basis of agreement of sale dated 03.10.2007 in respect of property bearing gat No. 159 to the extent of 1H 20R. During the pendency of the suit the plaintiff filed an application for amendment U/O 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure thereby seeking amendment in the plaint so also in the agreement. The said application is allowed. Aggrieved thereby the present petition is filed.

(3.) Shri Sapkal, the learned counsel for the petitioner/original defendant contends that the Court could not have allowed the amendment in the plaint so also in the agreement. The Court has no jurisdiction to allow the amendment in the agreement U/O 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure Code. The plaintiff in his application had very specifically sought amendment in the plaint to the effect that instead of gat No. 159 the same should be referred as gat No. 459 and also in the agreement of sale executed between the parties which is the basis for the suit, i. e. the said agreement of sale be amended and instead of gat No. 159 the same should be written as gat No. 459. The Court could not have allowed the application seeking amendment in the agreement. The same was beyond the jurisdiction of the Court. The learned counsel further submitted that no reasons are given for allowing the amendment in the plaint also. In such circumstances, the order cannot be sustained.