HARMINDER SINGH Vs. NIRMAL SINGH AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against order dated 20.01.2014 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Malerkotla whereby, the application for amendment of the written statement filed by defendant no. 1 has been dismissed. The reasoning given by the trial Court is that the facts stated to be brought on record by way of amendment were in the knowledge of the applicant and since the case was now fixed for evidence, the amendment could not be allowed and lastly the proposed amendment would change the nature of the whole defence.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently submitted that the application was filed merely after the closing of the evidence of the plaintiff and the defendant no. 1 would be gravely prejudiced if the amendment is not allowed and the same would only help the Court coming to a correct conclusion regarding the issue in dispute and submitted that the law regarding amendment of written statement is more liberal. It has further been submitted that issue no. 8 had already been framed regarding the fact that the agreement was a result of collusion and which had been executed in favour of the plaintiff as a collateral security, the onus of which was upon the defendant.

(3.) A perusal of the paper book would go on to show that the suit for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement dated 29.05.2004 and writing dated 28.05.2005 for the land in dispute was filed and a declaration was also sought that the sale deed dated 25.08.2004 in favour of defendant no. 2 was illegal, null and void and executed with a purpose to jeopardize the interest of the plaintiff. The defendant had already received a sum of Rs. 2,80,000/- from the plaintiff and accordingly, the mutation on the basis of the sale deed was also challenged and prayer was made that defendant no. 2 was to join defendant no. 1 for executing the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff and for delivering of possession. The alternative prayer for recovery of Rs. 5,60,000/- was also made apart from the prayer of permanent injunction.