SAROJ Vs. JOGINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has challenged the order dated 12.07.2018 passed by the Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Sonipat, vide which 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 the plaintiff filed a suit for mandatory injunction. In pith and substance the suit for mandatory injunction has been filed by incorporating the cause of action arising out of suit for specific performance. Paras No.3, 4, 8, 9 and 14 are reproduced hereasunder:-

(3.) Perusal of the aforesaid pleadings would show that the plaintiff in essence prayed for a direction to defendant No.1 to execute and register the sale deed in respect of suit property as she had already paid full payment under the agreement to sell dated 28.08.2006 and defendant No.2 has no right to purchase the same except the title of the suit and the relief in the form of direction, the pleadings are for the enforcement of agreement to sell dated 26.09.2011 vide which the full payment was made in favour of the defendant No.1 in the presence of witnesses and target date was fixed as 31.12.2011. It was also agreed that defendant No.1 will pay the entire loan amount in respect of the said land (if any) prior to 31.12.2011. The date for execution and registration of sale deed was further extended upto 20.08.2012 with mutual consent of the parties. It was so recorded at the back of agreement to sell dated 26.09.2011.