BASAPPA Vs. RAGHUNATH GONVINDRAO DESHPANDE AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition had been listed along with an application for stay. To avoid delay in the disposal of the revision and to avoid delay in disposal of the suit because of stay, I considered it necessary to call upon the learned counsel for the parties if they are ready to argue the case on merits. Learned counsel have been good enough to agree to argue the case on merits.

(2.) Heard Mr. G. Balakrishna Shastri, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Mr. I.G. Gachachinamath, assisted by Smt. Asha Kumargirmath, learned counsel for respondents 1(a) to 3 and Mr. Suresh P. Kudedareddi, learned counsel for respondents 4 to 7.

(3.) This revision petition arises from the judgment and order dated 5.3.1997 rejecting the application moved by the defendant No. 5 for amendment of the written statement whereby the defendants desired to claim in alternative that in case the plaintiff is held to be entitled to 1/2 share, then defendants being the owner of the remaining half share of suit property by virtue of sale deed dated 5.2.1987, prayed that a decree may also be passed in favour of defendant No. 5 i.e., the present revision petitioner holding that the defendant No. 5 to be entitled to 1/2 share and for putting him in actual possession thereof. The defendant No. 5 has alleged that he has purchased the property for a sum of Rs. 90,000.00. So the revision petitioner (defendant No. 5) expressed his willingness to pay the Court-fee on his share valued at Rs. 90,000.00 as in accordance with law and provisions of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act. The application for amendment was contested orally and the Trial Court dismissed it on the ground that the defendant has prayed for declaration and possession and his title against the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 4 which may amount to change of cause of action or which may result in introducing a new case, so this revision by defendant No. 5.