AVTAR KAUR Vs. VIDYA SAGAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the instant revision petition, preferred under Article 227 of the Contitution of India, is to order dated February 17, 2017 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Patiala, whereby an application filed by the petitioner-defendant No. 5 under Order 6, Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the written statement was dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that plaintiff-respondent No. 1 filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance on the basis of an agreement to sell dated April 25, 2008 pertaining to suit property measuring 1 bigha 6 biswa. It was pleaded in the plaint that plaintiff had entered into the aforesaid agreement with Sewa Singh, Amarjit Singh and Avtar Kaur. Sale deed was to be executed on April 09, 2009. It was alleged that vendors had disclosed that there was a civil litigation going on pertaining to the suit property and sale deed would be got executed when the litigation comes to an end and further, in case the lis does not end by the April 09, 2009, the date would be deemed to be automatically extended. Plaintiff alleged that he was not intimated that litigation had come to an end. This necessitated the plaintiff to file a suit for possession by way of specific performance.

(3.) The suit was contested by the defendants by filing written statement. Subsequently, defendant Nos. 4 and 5 moved an application under Order 6, Rule 17 CPC on the ground that their pleadings in the written statement could not clearly brought out their stand, which is being sought to be clarified by way of filing the aforesaid application for amendment of written statement. It was submitted that defendant Nos. 4 and 5 had already discharged the agreement by executing a sale deed dated October 14, 2010 in favour of Raj Mohan wife of Krishan Mohan, who is brother of plaintiff. There was a clause in the agreement to sell that sale deed was to be got executed in favour of the vendee (plaintiff) or any person nominated by him. Thus, on the asking of plaintiff, sale deed was executed in favour of one of his immediate family members. These facts, inadvertently, could not be mentioned in the written statement and accordingly, application under Order 6, Rule 17 CPC has been filed for amendment in written statement.