NARASIMHA REDDY Vs. B RAJESHWAR RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since these two revisions arise out of the order dated 11-2-2002 in I.A. No. 1210 of 2001 in O.S. No. 187 of 2001 on the file of the Court of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal, they are being disposed of by a common order. For the sake of convenience I would refer to the parties as they are arrayed in the suit.

(2.) The suit is filed by the plaintiff seeking perpetual injunction restraining the defendants and their men from interfering with his possession over the plaint schedule property. During the pendency of the suit the plaintiff filed I.A. No. 1210 of 2001 under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. to amend the plaint by introducing the relief of specific performance of an agreement of sale in his favour executed by the defendants. The petition is opposed on the ground that the proposed amendment, if allowed, would deprive the defendants of the valuable right of pleading the defence of limitation, and since the claim for specific performance is barred by time, the proposed amendment cannot be allowed. The learned Senior Civil Judge, after considering the rival contentions, allowed the petition for amendment and directed the plaintiff to deposit the necessary court fee and also the balance sale consideration on or before 25-2-2002. Aggrieved by the order allowing the petition for amendment, defendants filed C.R.P. No. 1372 of 2002 and aggrieved by the order to deposit the balance sale consideration, the plaintiff filed C.R.P. No. 2460 of 2002.

(3.) Heard the contentions of the learned counsel for the plaintiff and the defendants.