HARMINDER SINGH Vs. ASHOK KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed for setting aside the order dtd. 8/3/2017 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana, vide which the application dtd. 18/1/2017 filed by the plaintiff-petitioner for permission to amend the plaint has been dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts, relevant to the present lis, are that the plaintiff-petitioner herein filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance of agreements to sell dtd. 25/4/2008 and 24/6/2008 directing the defendants to execute and get registered sale deed of land measuring 4648 square yards out of Khasra Nos.105//18, 19, 22/2, 23/2, 105//22/1, 24/1 vide jamabandi for the year 2000-01 situated in village Kassabad, Tehsil and District Ludhiana. It is apt to mention that earlier the suit was for perpetual injunction and, thereafter, on an application for amendment the suit was converted into a suit for specific performance. Yet again, during the course of the trial, when the case was fixed for the plaintiff's evidence, the plaintiff-petitioner moved an application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for amendment of plaint wherein it was mentioned that due to a typing mistake the date of the first agreement was mentioned in the plaint as 25/4/2008 instead of 30/4/2008 and the area of the land sold was mentioned as 4048 square yards in para 1 of the plaint and the balance amount in para 5-A was mentioned as Rs.90,04,800.00 in place of Rs.1,00,08,800.00 and the last date for execution of the sale deed was mentioned as 20/4/2012 in para 7 and that the same mistake occurred in the affidavit submitted by the plaintiffpetitioner in his evidence. By way of the application, the plaintiff-petitioner wanted to substitute the date of the first agreement as 30/4/2008 instead of 25/4/2008 and further, the area of the plot as 4648 instead of 4048 square yards. Further, an amendment was also sought in the balance sale consideration amount which was mentioned as Rs.90,04,800.00 to be read as Rs.1,00,08,800.00. It was claimed that the minor mistakes occurred in the plaint due to typographical errors and due to inadvertence. The trial Court, vide a detailed order, dismissed the said application. Hence, the present revision petition.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.