SATINDER GILL AND OTHERS Vs. KIRPAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been preferred by the plaintiffs aggrieved by the order dated September 19, 2009 passed by the lower Appellate Court allowing the application of amendment of written statement filed under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC permitting the defendant- respondent to incorporate a detailed plea as to how fraud has been played upon him while procuring the disputed agreement of sale dated May 30, 1995.

(2.) Brief facts relevant for this case are that Surjit Singh, the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiff- petitioners had filed a suit for specific performance of agreement of sale dated May 30, 1995 for agricultural land mentioned in the heading of the plaint, claiming that defendant respondent Kirpal Singh through his attorney Jagdev Singh had entered into abovesaid agreement of sale. A sum of Rs.2 lacs had been paid by Surjit Singh to defendant- respondent as earnest money and a sum of Rs.80000/- was paid to him through his attorney on June 30, 1995. The remaining amount of consideration was to be paid at the time of execution of the sale deed which was to be executed on or before June 15, 1996.

(3.) Possession of the land was also allegedly handed over to the plaintiffs.