ZAFAR IQBAL vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FEROZEWALA O — 2023 SCMR 613 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

ZAFAR IQBAL VS ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FEROZEWALA O. VI, R. 17---amendment of plaint---Scope---Suit for specific performance of oral agreement to sell--- Respondents/plaintiffs (vendees) filed a suit for specific performance of a purported oral sale agreement against the defendant (vendor)---after filing of the said suit the vendor passed away and some of her legal heirs were brought on the record---Petitioner, who claimed to be one of the legal heirs of the vendor was not arrayed as a legal heir in the suit, therefore, he submitted an application for his impleadment in the suit as a defendant, which was allowed---Once the evidence in the suit was led and concluded, the respondents (vendees) filed an application seeking amendment of the plaint, alleging that the petitioner was not the son of the deceased vendor---Said application was dismissed by the Trial Court, however, the same was allowed by the revisional Court, whose order was sustained by the High Court in the impugned judgment---Validity---Interest of the respondents was better protected with the petitioner remaining a defendant, since in the eventuality that the suit were to be decreed without petitioner being arrayed as a party then he may file an application, under section 12(2), C.P.C., stating that the decree was obtained by fraud since he was a necessary party being a legal heir, yet was not arrayed as a defendant, and sought to set aside such decree---Respondents wanted to amend their plaint by challenging petitioner's paternity/maternity which had no connection with a suit which sought specific performance of a purported agreement---Defendants in the suit, including the petitioner, were keen to proceed with the suit, filed by the respondents nineteen years ago, but the respondents were delaying its conclusion, giving credence to the petitioner's contention that since the respondents were in possession of the suit property they did not want the suit to be decided---In the facts and circumstances of the case, Trial Court had rightly dismissed the respondents' application for amendment of the plaint---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, impugned orders of the revisional court and the High Court were set aside with costs imposed on the respondents throughout as they had abused the process of the court and indulged in unnecessary litigation.

ZAFAR IQBAL vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FEROZEWALA O — 2023 SCMR 613 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 SCMR