DAMODHARDAS GOVINDPRASAD SANGI Vs. FATEHSINH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, petitioner has challenged the order dtd. 30/8/2021 passed by 2nd Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division, Nanded below Exh.118 in Special Civil Suit No.27 of 2020 allowing application filed by respondent nos.1 and 2 - original plaintiffs for amendment of the plaint under Order-VI, Rule-17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the "CPC").

(2.) Plaintiff nos.1 and 2 are real brothers of defendant no.1. It is the case of plaintiffs that while obtaining lease in respect of the suit property by their father, defendant no.1 (plaintiffs" brother) was minor and out of pure love and affection, their father added his name in the lease agreement. After their father passed away, series of litigation took place between defendant no.1 and defendant nos.5 to 11 over the suit property. Initially defendant nos.5 to 11 decided to sell the suit property. Plaintiffs alleged that defendants ought to have purchased the suit property jointly in the name of two plaintiffs and defendant no.1 as the original lease deed was obtained through funds of their father. However the sale-deeds in respect of the suit land were admittedly executed in favour of defendant no.1 alone on 16/9/2017 (by defendant nos.5 to 11) and 9/11/2017 (by defendant no.12). This has led to filing of Special Civil Suit No.27 of 2020 by two plaintiffs against their brother (defendant no.1), his children (defendant nos.2 to 4) as well as defendant nos.5 to 11. In the unamended plaint, plaintiffs prayed for 1/3rd share each in the suit property as well as recovery thereof. They also sought declaration that the sale-deeds dtd. 16/9/2017 and 9/11/2017 are illegal and not binding on them. They also sought injunction against defendant nos.5 to 12 from alienating suit properties. They also sought damages of Rs. Five Crores against defendant nos.5 to 12.

(3.) Before the trial of the suit would commence, plaintiffs filed application for amendment of the plaint on 23/2/2021. By way of amendment, plaintiffs sought to completely overhaul the prayers in the suit by deleting most of the original prayers and substituted the same by the following prayers.