VEMCHARLA PADMANATHAMMA Vs. SHANTILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revision-petitioners are the defendants in a suit filed by the respondent against them for recovery of the advance paid by him under an agreement of sale of the property belonging to them, on the ground revision petitioners committed breach of the agreement in which revision- petitioners filed written statement inter alia contending that it is the respondent that committed breach of the agreement and for the breach committed by him, they suffered a huge loss, and so they are entitled to forfeit the amount paid by the respondent under the agreement of sale as advance.

(2.) During the pendency of the suit, they filed a petition seeking leave of the Court to amend their written statement inter alia contending that as they had to sell the property covered by the agreement of sale under a registered sale deed dated 21-11-2002 for a small price to Smt. Kamala Devi and incurred a heavy loss, that plea also may be permitted to be incorporated in their written statement, on the ground that the plea sought to be taken by them is but an elaboration of the plea already taken in their written statement. The trial Court dismissed the said petition. Hence, this revision.

(3.) The contention of the learned Counsel for the revision-petitioners is that since the Court can take into consideration the subsequent events, the fact that the revision-petitioners were constrained to sell the property covered by the agreement of sale at a lower price, is a relevant fact in the suit and so the revision-petitioners may be permitted to bring the subsequent events on record by suitably amending their written statement.