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