Manoj Misra, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
(2.) The plaintiff- respondent instituted O.S. No. 274 of 1996 for mandatory injunction seeking direction upon the defendant to deliver possession of the suit property pursuant to the auction dated 30.9.1992 and for other ancillary reliefs. It appears that the suit was contested by the defendant petitioners on various grounds. During the pendency of the suit, an application was moved by the plaintiff respondent bearing Paper No. 73 Ka for amendment in the plaint for addition of paragraph 9 A and for addition of an alternative relief in the plaint. The amendment application was moved by alleging that subsequently, it was discovered that a decision was taken by the State Government annuling the auction proceeding and therefore the alternative relief to refund the money deposited by the plaintiff pursuant to the auction proceeding was necessitated.
(3.) The trial court by order dated 12.8.2016 rejected the application on two grounds. The first ground was that from the record it appeared that auction proceedings were cancelled in the year 1999 therefore the alternative relief seeking refund of the amount was barred by limitation and as such could not have been allowed. The second ground was that the suit had remained pending for several years and in between there were occasions when the suit had been dismissed for non prosecution and thereafter restored, therefore, the suit being an old suit amendment at such belated stage was not justified.;