LANDEAL CORPORATION Vs. BONICE ELIZABETH ALLAMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Chamber Summons has been taken out with a prayer that the name of the plaintiff No.2 be deleted and they be transposed as defendant No.6 in the suit. It is also prayed that the plaintiff No.1 be permitted to amend the plaint and proceedings on the plaintiff No.2 being transposed as defendant No.6. The proposed amendments are contained in the schedule attached to the Chamber Summons. In clause No.7 it is proposed to delete paragraph 18 of the plaint and substitute the following as paragraph 18 :

(2.) AN affidavit in support of the Chamber Summons has been filed. Plaintiff No.2 has filed the reply, to which the plaintiff No.1 has filed the rejoinder. The plaintiff No.1 and the plaintiff No.2 have filed the suit inter alia for declaration that the agreement for sale dated 23rd November, 1972 as modified by agreement dated 2nd December, 1974, between the plaintiff No.1 and the defendants in respect of the suit property is valid and subsisting and the defendants are bound and liable to perform the same specifically. Prayer is made for a decree against the defendants to specifically perform the aforesaid agreements in favour of the plaintiff No.1 and/or their nominee or nominees and/or plaintiff No.2. and/or their nominee or nominees respectively.

(3.) SHAKTIDHARAM and 13 others, being the original partners as well as the present partners of the plaintiff No.1 have filed Suit No. 550 of 1983 against the plaintiff No.1. The plaintiff No.2 is impleaded as the defendant No.5 in the said suit. The claim put forward in that suit is that the agreement dated 13th November, 1980, allegedly entered into by P.G. Shah on behalf of the plaintiff No.1 with the plaintiff No.2 is void, as the basis of the said agreement is collusion between P.G. Shah and the plaintiff No.2 to defraud the plaintiffs in Suit No. 550 of 1983. Thus, the plaintiff no.1 is impleaded as defendant No.1 in the said suit.