Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from an agreement for the sale of immovable property between the appellant and the respondent. The appellant paid part of the consideration and was put in possession of the property, but the respondent failed to execute the registered sale deed. The appellant filed a suit for specific performance but did not include an averment of readiness and willingness to perform his part of the agreement, leading the respondent to argue that the suit was not maintainable under Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. The trial court rejected the appellant's application to amend the plaint to include this averment, and the High Court dismissed the revision petition, citing the amendment as being beyond the limitation period and potentially disturbing the respondent's vested rights. The Supreme Court, however, held that amendments should generally be allowed unless they cause injustice or introduce a fresh cause of action that is barred by limitation. The Court found that the amendment sought was merely to complete the existing cause of action and did not introduce a new claim. The Court distinguished the case from precedents cited by the respondent, emphasizing that the appellant's amendment was necessary to comply with legal requirements for specific performance suits. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and permitted the amendment to be made at the appellant's expense, directing the trial court to proceed with the case on merits thereafter.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Amendment of plaint - Principles governing amendments - Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order VI Rule 17 - Amendments should be allowed unless they cause injustice to the other party or introduce a fresh cause of action barred by limitation. In this case, the amendment sought was to complete the cause of action for specific performance without introducing a new cause, thus the rejection was erroneous. (Paras 475-477) B) Specific Relief - Readiness and willingness - Requirement in specific performance suits - Specific Relief Act, 1963, Section 16(c) - The plaintiff must allege readiness and willingness to perform the contract. The amendment was necessary to comply with this legal requirement, and its denial was unjustified. (Paras 477-478)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the application for amendment of the plaint in a suit for specific performance.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and permitted the amendment to be made at the appellant's expense within eight weeks. The trial court was directed to allow the respondent to file a supplementary written statement and dispose of the case on merits according to law.
Law Points
- Amendment of plaint
- Specific performance
- Readiness and willingness
- Limitation period
- Discretion of court
