MANOHAR LAL Vs. LAJWANTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS controversy here pertains to amendment of plaint.

(2.) THE plaintiff-Manohar Lal, filed a suit for injunction to restrain the defendant from alienating the land in suit. The relief claimed being founded upon agreement of June 8, 1970. This suit was filed in June, 1981. It was when the suit was at the stage of arguments that on January 25, 1988, the plaintiff moved an application for amendment of the plaintiff with a view to see the relief of specific performance of the agreement of June 8, 1970. In making this application, it was also stated by the counsel for the plaintiff that if the amendment is allowed, no further evidence would be led by the plaintiff on the re-framed issues. In other words, no further delay in the disposal of the suit would be entailed thereby. The amendment was, however, opposed by the defendants and it was consequently disallowed mainly for the reason that grave injustice would be caused if it is allowed as the period of limitation had already elapsed.

(3.) AS regards the aspect of the prejudice or injustice to the defendants, it would be pertinent to note that limitation for a suit for specific performance founded upon the agreement of June 8, 1970 still endures as the time fixed for the performance of the agreement was two months after permission for the sale of the share of the minors, is obtained from the Court. Admittedly, one of the vendors is still a minor and no application has been moved yet for seeking such permission from any Court. This being so, no right has yet come to vest in the defendants by lapse of time nor is the relief sought by the plaintiff barred by limitation.