SAHIB SINGH Vs. BRIJ LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has challenged the order dtd. 15/1/2018 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Patiala, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for amendment of the plaint under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was dismissed.

(2.) Perusal of the record would show that initially a civil suit for permanent injunction was filed by the plaintiff/petitioner against the defendant/respondent on the basis of agreement to sell dtd. 10/4/2014 in which target date for execution of sale deed was fixed as 31/12/2014. Civil suit was filed on 31/7/2014 on the premise that during currency of the period of agreement to sell, defendant intended to part with the property in favour of somebody else. In that suit, an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was filed on 22/4/2016 seeking to convert the suit for permanent injunction into a specific performance. The said application has been dismissed by the trial Court on the premise that plaintiff can file his individual suit on the basis of cause of action arising out of agreement to sell.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent stated that respondent had already filed a suit for declaration, challenging the Will dtd. 18/3/1999 in favour of the petitioner. During the currency of the said suit, the alleged agreement to sell dtd. 10/4/2014 came to be executed by forged signatures of the respondent. Learned counsel further stated that the aforesaid agreement has been forged in order to compel the respondent to withdraw the suit. He has admitted that the said suit filed by the respondent seeking declaration qua the Will dtd. 18/3/1999 has been dismissed by the trial Court, however, the first appeal is pending before the Lower Appellate Court.