P RAMA TILAKAM DEVI Vs. TEKAM SATYABATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revisional application is against Order dated July 18, 1992 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Berhampur allowing an application for amendment of the plaint.

(2.) THE plaintiff opp. party filed a suit for specific performance. In the plaint the plaintiff made averment about what he had done in pursuance of the disputed agreement in order to obtain performance of the same from the defendant. I have gone through the entire plaint and it appears that the facts pleaded in the plaint and other averments made therein constitute substantial compliance with the requirements of Section 16(c) of the Special Relief Act. The plaintiff -opp. party, however, filed the application for amendment by way of abundant caution to avoid technical objection. The trial Court allowed the said amendment placing reliance on an unreported judgment of this High Court in Civil Revision Case No. 586 of 1988 (Gudisa Trinath Rao v. Sudhansu Prasad Padhi andAnr.)

(3.) IN the unreported judgment in Civil Revision Case No. 586 of 1988 A. Pasayat.J. expressly said that he was unable to agree with the views expressed in the aforementioned judgments of Patna and Allahabad High Courts. It has been held therein that: 'Where in a plaint for specific performance of a contract, the legal requirement of an averment of continuous readiness and willingness is substantially complied with, there can be no objection to amend the plaint, to add the language of the statute to this averment.' His Lordship derived support from a decision reported in AIR 1988 Guj. 4 (Rajya Tulsibhai Patel v. Benar Enterprise and Ors.) in which a Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court held that - 'To insist on a mechanical reproduction of the exact words o the statute would be to insist on form rather than substance Upon an analysis of the facts averred in the plaint the Court finds that even though the exact words of the statute are no reproduced, the facts reveal that the plaintiff has performed all the essential terms and conditions of the contract up to the date of the institution of the suit and has shown his willingness to perform the remaining terms of the contract, the requirement of law, would stand satisfied.'