ISHAN CHANDRA DAS,J. - (1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties.
(2.) In the revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the propriety of the Order No. 29 dated 31st August, 2006 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Barasat in Title Suit No. 30 of 1998 has been called in question. In the order impugned, learned court below while disposing of the application under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure allowed the same on the ground that such prayer for amendment of the plaint will minimise the litigation and the court should act liberally while dealing with a prayer for amendment of plaint.
(3.) The background of the instant application was that initially the parties to the proceedings were entered into an agreement for lease of a part of the disputed properties on 27th February, 1995 and subsequently another agreement for sale of the said property was also entered into between the parties on the 27th January, 1999. The suit being Title Suit No. 30 of 1998 was filed for specific performance on the strength of the agreement dated 27th February, 1995 and subsequently by way of amendment the plaintiff of Title Suit No. 30 of 1998 i.e., the opposite party no. 1 herein intended to introduce subsequent agreement dated 27th January, 1999.;