IN THE COURT OF C.J.S.D.

BARAMATI, AT BARAMATI
R.C.S No.54/2016

Shivaji Vasant Kale …………… Plaintiff

Vs.
Suman Subhash Bhingare ……………. Defendants

The say file on be half of defendants no. 1 to 5 for Exh. is as under

1)That the application file by plaintiff under Order 6 Rule 17 of C.P.C. is totally
false, frivolous & it kindly may be rejected.

2)That the Hon’ble Court had framed the issues in present matters. The said civil
suit date is fixed for hearing of plaintiff evidence. Hence plaintiff filed amendment
application be late stage. Hence amendment application kindly may be rejected
with cost.

3)That the present amendment application is changing the nature of suit. The
Plaintiff added new story by way of amendment application.

4) that the plaintiff has suppress material fact in the court. Because plaintiff is
witness of Register Irrevocable Power of Attorney bearing Registered
No.6401/2018, And Register Agreement of sale deed bearing no. 6400/2018.
The plaintiff is well know the this Irrevocable Power of Attorney & Agreement of
sale deed. Hence amendment application kindly may rejected one.

5) That the Hon’ble court see the O.6 R.17 proviso clause is that No application
for amendment shall be allowed after the trail has commenced , unless the court
comes to conclusion that in spite of due diligence, the party could not have the
matter before the commencement of trail. Hence amendment application kindly
may rejected one.

6)That the plaintiff acquires right by bar of limitation & if the same is sought to be
taken away by amendment of the pleading, amendment in such circumstances
would be refused. That the proposes amendment creating a new case hence
application cannot be allowed.

7)That the delay in flinging present amendment application the same rejected
one. Because the plaintiff seeking amendment to bring on record the subsequent
development occurring of proceeding. And amendment application cannot
allowed to multiplicity of proceeding & unnecessary expenses because plaintiff is
well known the Register Irrevocable Power of Attorney & Agreement of sale
deed.

8)That the plea taken by plaintiff is inconsistence or disruptive to original plea

because plaintiff is original pray for specific performance of contract & then after
he want to cancellation of Register Irrevocable Power of Attorney & Agreement
of sale deed.

9) That the amendment of pleading application normally denied when party are
acting malafied because plaintiff is suppressing material fact in the court. And
plaintiff cannot go for clean hands. Hence an application for amendment should
not be allowed , the court should go into the correctness or falsity of the case in
the amendment.

10) In case Hon’ble court is allowed the amendment application then great
cause prejudice affect defendants because hole suit nature is change.

11) Hence therefore Defendants No 1 to 5 request to this Hon’ble court

a) The amendment application filed by plaintiff in Exh. kindly may rejected

b) Any passed any other order in the interest of justice.

Hence this request say.

Baramati

Date : /03/2021 Adv. For Defendants Defendant No. 1 to 5

(Adv.Y.D.Raut) (No.5 himself & No. 1 to 4 POH)