This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order and decreetal order dated 25.03.2015 passed in I.A.No.40 of 2014 in O.S.No.1737 of 2011 on the file of 2nd Additional District Munsif, Tiruchirappalli.
2.Originally, the respondent/defendant filed a suit in O.S.No.1695 of 2011 on the file of II Additional District Munsif, Tiruchirappalli, seeking permanent injunction. The revision petitioner/plaintiff filed O.S.No.1737 of 2011 before the same Court seeking permanent injunction and during the pendency of the said suit, the revision petitioner filed amendment application in I.A.No.40 of 2014 to convert the prayer into that of specific performance. The Trial Court after discussion in detail, dismissed the amendment application, against which, the present revision petition has been filed.
3.Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that at the time of filing of O.S.No.1737 of 2011, the revision petitioner filed I.A.No.900 of 2011 reserving her right to claim specific performance of the agreement dated 13.11.2011 on a future date and the same was allowed. Thereafter, the petitioner filed I.A.No.899 of 2011 in O.S.No.1737 of 2011 under Order 2 Rule 2 CPC which was allowed and ad-interim injunction was also granted. It is further contended that at the time of filing of O.S.No.1737 of 2011, the exact extent of the suit property could not be ascertained by the petitioner. Subsequently, the petitioner filed application in I.A.No.40 of 2014 praying to amend the plaint for specific performance. The learned Judge dismissed the application stating that already an application to file a separate suit for specific performance in future was allowed by the Court and therefore, the present application for amendment could not be entertained.
4.Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since there is already an order for filing a suit for specific performance, the period pertaining to the pendency of this revision petition before this Court should be dispensed with for the purpose of limitation in filing the suit for specific performance.
5.Considering the said submission, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed with an observation that in case, the petitioner files a suit for specific performance, the period during which this revision petition was pending before this Court should be excluded for the purpose of limitation in filing the suit for specific performance. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
To II Additional District Munsif, Tiruchirappalli.
.