SHARWAN KUMAR MITTAL Vs. VIBHA GOEL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff is before this Court impugning the order dated 4.9.2014 passed by the learned Court below, whereby the application filed for amendment of the plaint was dismissed.

(2.) The proceedings arise out of a suit filed by the plaintiff for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 12.8.2009. It is claimed that the suit was filed by the plaintiff as talks of compromise failed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner-vendee submitted that respondent nos. 1 and 2/ vendors agreed to sell House No. 1240, Urban Estate, Jind, vide agreement dated 12.8.2009 to the petitioner-vendee for a total sale consideration of Rs. 50,25,000/-. Earnest money of Rs. 2,00,000/- was paid. Sale deed was to be executed on or before 1.12.2009. The vendors having not got the sale-deed executed on or before the date fixed, the suit for possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell was filed on 1.11.2010. During the pendency of the suit, an application for amendment of the plaint was filed seeking to challenge the communication dated 28.12.2009 addressed by the vendors to the vendee cancelling the agreement. It was required on account of judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in I. S. Sikandar (D) By LRs. Vs K. Subramani and others, 2014 1 RCR(Civ) 236. The amendment has been sought only in the title and prayer clause of the plaint. No evidence is to be led as the entire evidence is already on record. It was further submitted that nature and cause of action of the suit will not change as the ultimate relief is possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell. The amendment was necessitated only because of judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court. It is not a case of lack of due diligence as the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court came very recently. The power to allow amendment at any stage is quite wide. In support of the arguments, reliance was placed upon judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Puran Ram vs Bhaguram and another, 2008 AIR(SC) 1960 Prithi Pal Singh and another vs Amrik Singh and others, 2014 1 RCR(Civ) 327, Abdul Rehman and another vs Mohd. Ruldu and others, 2012 4 RCR(Civ) 481, and judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court in Institute of Education, Ramachandrapuram, rep. by its President Smt. V. Ganga Bhavani vs Ramachandrapuram Municipality, Commissioner and another,2014 3 CivCC 538. It was further submitted that after the amendment is allowed, the same relates back to the date of filing of the suit.