27 November 1995
Supreme Court
Download

G. NAGAMMA Vs SIROMANAMMA

Bench: RAMASWAMY,K.
Case number: C.A. No.-011619-011619 / 1995
Diary number: 10204 / 1995
Advocates: AMLAN KUMAR GHOSH Vs D. BHARATHI REDDY


1

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: G. NAGAMMA & ANR.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: SIROMANAMMA & ANR.

DATE OF JUDGMENT27/11/1995

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. HANSARIA B.L. (J)

CITATION:  1996 SCC  (2)  25        1995 SCALE  (7)353

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      The appellants  laid the  suit for specific performance of the  agreement of  reconveyance dated  30th August, 1967. Application  under  Order  16  Rule  17  of  Code  of  Civil Procedure, 1908 was filed seeking amendment of the plaint by incorporating  averments   in  para   3  thereof.  Thus  the appellants pleaded  that the  transactions of  execution  of sale deed  and obtaining  a document  for reconveyance  were single transactions.  viz., mortgage by conditional sale. In paragraph 9,  they wanted  alternative relief  to redeem the mortgage. At  the end  of the  prayer, the  plaintiff sought alternatively to  grant a decree for redemption of mortgage. This  application  was  rejected  by  the  Trail  Court.  On revision, the  High Court  of Andhra  Pradesh confirmed  the same holding  that in  the original  plaint the suit was for specific  performance   and   the   reconveyance   was   not incorporated in  the sale  deed  and  that,  therefore,  the amendment was  not warranted.  Amendment  would  change  the nature of the suit as well as cause of action.      We  called  upon  the  appellant  to  produce  original agreement  of   reconveyance.  We  have  seen  the  original document which  contains the  recitals  in  support  of  the contention raised  by the appellants. It is settled law that the plaintiff  is entitled to plead even inconsistent pleas. In this  case, they  are seeking  alternative  reliefs.  The application was  for amendment of the plaint whereby neither cause of  action  could  change  nor  the  relief  could  be materially affected. We allow the same.      The appellants  shall file  amended plaint. It would be open to  the respondents to raise all the defences by filing additional written statement. The Trail Court is directed to dispose of the suit within eight months from the date of the receipt of this order.      The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.

2

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2