Civil Revision No.2638 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.2638 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 01.12.2010 Krishna Nand ....Petitioner Versus Shiv Kumar @ Shiv Nath ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. Amit Aggarwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate, for the respondent. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 13.1.2010 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Naraingarh, whereby application moved by the plaintiff/petitioner seeking amendment in the plaint was rejected. Brief facts of the present case are that plaintiff has filed suit for specific performance of the contract pursuant to the agreement to sell dated 4.5.2002. By way of amendment, plaintiff wants to mention in the plaint date of agreement as “4.6.2003” instead of “4.5.2002”, which was declined by the learned trial Court. Learned counsel for the respondent stated that alleged agreement to sell filed on the record suggests date of the agreement as Civil Revision No.2638 of 2010 (O&M) -2- 4.5.2002. He further argued that if amendment is allowed, then the date of agreement would be 4.6.2003, hence alleged agreement dated 4.5.2002 would be treated as beyond the pleadings. Learned counsel for the defendant/respondent further states that with liberty to raise all the points about the admissibility of the document, present amendment may be allowed, subject to payment of heavy cost. In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondent, amendment is allowed, subject to payment of Rs.20,000/- as cost. However, defendant shall be at liberty to file additional written statement and to raise all the legal points available under the law. (Alok Singh) Judge December 01, 2010 R.S.