KAMLESH RANI Vs. RAJ RANI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner had an agreement to sell in her favour in the year 2001. She in the year 2008 pleaded that pursuant to the agreement of the year 2001 some more amount had been paid to the respondents which has resulted in the creation of a fresh agreement to sell which she now wants to enforce by seeking an amendment to the suit for permanent injunction which was filed earlier. In this view of the matter when the petitioner did not file a suit for specific performance to enforce the agreement to sell of the year 2001 i.e. in the first instance and now by the amendment seeks such a relief, it seems that the conduct of the petitioner is shrouded with suspicion and the amendment sought seems to be an attempt to overcome the hurdles of limitation. The trial court was then right in declining the prayer. Petition is without any merit and is dismissed. The petitioner, if advised, may file a fresh suit.