DEV RAJ DUA Vs. MADAN LAL & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Costs of Rs.2000.00 as imposed by this Court on 31/5/2018 has since been deposited with the Haryana State Legal Services Authority vide receipt No.0002041 dtd. 25/7/2018. Present revision petition is directed against the impugned order dtd. 27/8/2015 (P.4) whereby the application of the plaintiff-petitioner for amendment of the plaint in a suit for declaration with consequential relief of possession and permanent injunction has been dismissed.

(2.) The petitioner-plaintiff filed suit for declaration with consequential relief of possession and permanent injunction on the premise that respondent No.1 had entered into agreement to sell dtd. 15/11/1994 qua suit property for sale consideration of Rs.48,000.00, which was received by the defendant from the plaintiff and the plaintiff was put in possession of the property but the defendant attempted to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit property. Injunction suit was filed by the plaintiff against respondent- defendant No.1, which was decided vide judgment and decree dtd. 29/1/2014. Plaintiff approached defendant Nos.2 & 3, who were inducted as tenants over the property of the plaintiff but refused to vacate the house alleging that they had purchased the suit property from defendant No.1 vide sale deed dtd. 14/12/2010. In such circumstances, cause of action arose for the plaintiff to seek the relief of specific performance with consequential relief of declaration and possession with permanent injunction. The following amendment were sought to be incorporated in para 5(a), 10 as also the prayer clause respectively:-

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the trial Court has erred while rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for amendment of pleadings. Aforesaid amendments are very essential for proper adjudication of the present case and shall enable the trial Court to decide the controversy easily. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents-defendants submitted that the amendments sought to be incorporated are barred by law of limitation. These pleas were already available to the plaintiff and having not been diligent, the same cannot be incorporated especially when the suit is ripe for arguments as it will not only change the cause of action but would amount to change the nature of the suit.