JODHA SINGH @ JODHAN SINGH Vs. RAJINDER KAUR ETC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent-plaintiff Gurnam Singh had filed a suit for recovery of Rs.11,25,000/- along with future interest @ 12% per annum for non performance of the agreement dated 25.10.2005 by the defendants. Decree of permanent injunction had also been sought restraining defendant No.1 from alienating the property in litigation.

(2.) Perusal of the copy of suit (Annexure P-7) reveals that defendant No.1 Jodha Singh had entered into an agreement to sell with the plaintiff in respect of the land detailed therein measuring 14 kanal 14 marla situated at village Jalalpur (Patiala) for a total sale consideration of Rs.39.00 lacs per acre. On receipt of balance sale consideration on or before 15.6.2007, the sale deed was to be executed in favour of the plaintiff and defendant No.11. This period was extended to 1.10.2008 at the instance of defendant No.1. When the suit has reached the final stage, the defendants have sought amendment in the written statement to the effect that in fact the agreement to sell was not for land measuring 14 kanal 14 marla but was for land measuring 29 kanal 9 marla as land of defendant No.1 as also of his brother Gurdev Singh was included therein.

(3.) There is no such plea in the written statement originally preferred by the defendants. The trial court discussing all the relevant aspects, came to a firm finding of fact that defendant No.1 wanted to change the tenor and temperament of the suit and thus in fact was venturing to resile from the statement already made in the written statement by filing a fresh written statement in terms of order VI Rule 16 CPC. Sequelly, application for amendment of the written statement of defendant No.1 was dismissed on 30.9.2014 (Annexure P-12), which order is under challenge by the petitioner-defendant No.1.