BALESHWAR Vs. RAJINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the present petition filed by the plaintiff is to the order dated 2.3.2012, passed by the learned court below, whereby the application filed by him for amendment of the plaint to seek alternative relief of refund of earnest money along with interest in a suit for possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell, was dismissed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in terms of proviso to Section 21(5) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (for short, 'the Act'), alternative relief of refund of earnest money along with interest can be sought by way of amendment at any stage of the proceedings. The petitioner-plaintiff has already led his evidence for the purpose of adding the relief of refund of earnest money along with interest. He is not required to lead any evidence. It is only to take care of the eventuality where the court may think it appropriate to grant the alternative relief. He further submitted that though earlier the petitioner had filed an application for amendment of the plaint, however, the same was for impleading subsequent buyer of the property as one of the defendants. The proceedings in the suit will not be delayed, rather, in case the amendment is allowed, the court will be able to decide the dispute effectively.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that trial in the case had already started. It is at the stage of defendants' evidence. It is not the sweet-will of the petitioner-plaintiff to move application for amendment at any stage he deems fit. Earlier also, an application for amendment of the plaint was moved. The petitioner should have taken care of to add the relief in question at that stage. The object is only to delay the disposal of the suit and prolong the agony of the respondents-defendants.