RAJESH BINDAL, J. - (1.) IN the present petition, defendant has sought to challenge order dated October 18, 2006 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Faridabad whereby the application filed by the petitioner/defendant under Order 14 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short "the Code") for amendment of issue and for framing of additional issues was dismissed.
(2.) BRIEFLY the facts, are that the petitioner agreed to sell the property vide agreement entered into on October 15, 2004. On failure of the petitioner to execute the sale deed, the respondent filed a suit for specific performance on December 24, 2005. On the pleadings of the parties, learned trial Court framed the following issues :- "1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell dated 15.10.2004 in respect of the suit land ? OPP 2. Whether the plaintiff was always ready and still ready to perform his part of contract, if so that effect? OPP 3. Whether the suit is bad on account of non-joinder of necessary parties? 4. Relief." However, dissatisfied with the issues framed the petitioner/defendant moved an application under Order 14 rule 1 and 2 of the Code for framing the following additional issues :- "1. Whether the suit property is Hindu Coparcenary property and is not alienable as alleged? 2. Whether the defendant has only 1/7th share in the suit property as alleged ? 3. Whether the plaintiff is estopped from filing the present suit as alleged ? 4. Whether the impugned agreement has become impossible for performance as alleged and the offer of refund of Rs. 4 lacs to the plaintiff is justified in the circumstances of the case ?
(3.) IT is this application, which was rejected by the learned trial Court vide order dated October 18, 2006, which is impugned in the present petition.;