H.S. Bhalla, J. - (1.) THROUGH this revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for setting aside of order dated 16.5:2007 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Panchkula, whereby application moved under Order 6 Rule 17, Civil Procedure Code, for amendment of the plaint has been dismissed.
(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and have also gone through the impugned order. Question of amendment of the pleadings is to be considered in such a manner as to enable the Courts in determining the real question of controversy between the parties. It is settled law that applications for amendment are to be allowed liberally and it is only in extra cases such application should be rejected. Consideration of the court while dealing with the cases for amendment should be whether amendment sought for, if allowed, will cause injustice or loss to other parties and whether the amendment is necessary for the purpose of determining the real question between the parties. Moreover, proposed amendment will not cause prejudice to other, which can be compensated by means of costs. To my mind, no party should suffer on account of the technicalities of law and the amendments should be allowed to minimize the litigation between the parties. All the amendments will be generally permissible when they are necessary for determination of the real controversy in the suit.
(3.) IN the instant case, I find that the present petitioner has filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the respondent or her partner or any other person or on her behalf from alienating Plot No. 15, Sector 25, Panchkula, to anyone else except the present petitioner. He has further sought a decree for mandatory injunction directing the respondent -defendant to transfer the said house in the name of the petitioner in accordance with agreement to sell dated 6.12.2004. Meaning thereby that, entire controversy revolves around agreement to sell mentioned above. The petitioner, by way of proposed amendment, wants to convert the suit into one for Specific Performance of the agreement to sell qua suit property. The main controversy between the parties is with regard to an agreement dated 2.4.200S specific performance of which is being sought by the petitioner by way of proposed amendment.;