MOST. MADHURI DEVI Vs. CHHEDU SAHU AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, wherein order dated 17.08.2017 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division)-II, Lohardaga in Title Suit No.11 of 2006 has been assailed, whereby and whereunder an application filed under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure allowing the petitioner/plaintiff to make necessary amendment pertaining to refund of earnest money and the compensation to the tune of Rs.1,50,0000/- for breach of contract has been denied by rejecting the aforesaid application.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner by referring to the provision under Sections 21 and 22 of Specific Relief Act, 1963 has submitted that at any stage of the suit, the prayer for grant of compensation as also the earnest money can be made, since the aforesaid statutory provision provides that the amount of compensation or the earnest money can only be made, if specific prayer has been made in the plaint. The case of the petitioner is that due to inadvertence and bonafide mistake, the aforesaid prayer could not have been made, therefore, the application has been filed under the provision of Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking the aforesaid prayer.

(3.) The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the suit for performance of specific relief but in alternative the earnest money which he has given to the defendant along with the compensation is required to be paid by him in order to compensate for breach of the aforesaid contract. He submits that in the written statement complete denial has been made regarding the aforesaid agreement and specific prayer has been made as per the provision contained in Sections 21 and 22 of Specific Relief Act, the same can be adjudicated upon.