Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, original plaintiffs in Special Civil Suit No.1324/2017, filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement for sale of immovable property. The property was described in the agreement as land at Gumgaon, Survey Nos.3/1 and 3/3, admeasuring 1 Hector 67 R. In the plaint, the plaintiffs inadvertently described the area as '1 Hector 67 R' (the same as the agreement) but later sought to amend the plaint to correct the area to '1 Hector 67 R' (which was actually the same) and to add a prayer for possession. The trial court rejected the amendment application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC, holding that it introduced a new cause of action. The High Court, in the present writ petition, examined whether the amendment changed the nature of the suit. The court noted that the description of the property in the plaint was already consistent with the agreement, and the amendment was merely clarificatory. The addition of a prayer for possession was held to be consequential to the relief of specific performance and did not introduce a new cause of action. The court allowed the petition, set aside the trial court's order, and permitted the amendment, subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000 to the respondents. The court emphasized that the defendants would have an opportunity to contest the amended plaint.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Plaint - Order VI Rule 17 CPC - Correction of Property Description - The plaintiffs sought to amend the plaint to correct the area of the suit property from '1 Hector 67 R' to '1 Hector 67 R' (as per the agreement) and to add a prayer for possession. The trial court rejected the amendment on the ground that it introduced a new cause of action. The High Court held that the amendment merely sought to bring the plaint in conformity with the agreement and did not change the nature of the suit or introduce a new cause of action. The court allowed the amendment, observing that the description of property in the plaint was already consistent with the agreement and the amendment was only clarificatory. (Paras 5-8) B) Specific Performance - Amendment of Plaint - Addition of Prayer for Possession - The plaintiffs sought to add a prayer for possession of the suit property. The High Court held that such a prayer is consequential to the relief of specific performance and does not introduce a new cause of action. The court allowed the amendment, noting that the defendants would have an opportunity to contest the claim. (Paras 6-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the proposed amendment to the plaint, seeking to correct the area of the suit property from 1 Hector 67 R to 1 Hector 67 R (as per agreement) and to add a prayer for possession, introduces a new cause of action or changes the nature of the suit, and whether the trial court erred in rejecting the amendment application.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the trial court's order dated 30/08/2016, and allowed the amendment application subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000 to the respondents. The trial court was directed to permit the amendment and proceed with the suit.
Law Points
- Amendment of plaint
- Order VI Rule 17 CPC
- Specific performance
- Cause of action
- Correction of description
