Dr. Chandrachud, J.

With the consent of learned Counsel for the Appellants and the Respondents, the appeal is taken up for final hearing.

Counsel for Respondents 1 to 7, 9 to 28 & 50 to 55 waives service.

2. The appeal arises from a judgment of a learned Single Judge dated 18 April 2012 by which the Chamber Summons that was taken out by the Appellants, who were the original Plaintiffs, for the amendment of a plaint in a suit for specific performance has been dismissed.

3. The Appellants instituted a suit in July 2011 seeking specific performance of an agreement dated 7 December 1984 under which Respondents 1 to 28 agreed to sell the suit property to the Appellants. The Appellants claimed that in pursuance of the agreement, they were put in possession of the property and paid an amount of Rs.50.33 lakhs to Respondents 1 to 28. The Appellants also claimed to have prosecuted three suits pending in the City Civil Court at their own costs and expenses. According to the Appellants, they have incurred expenses in the amount of approximately Rs.2 crores towards the litigation. On 16 February 2010, 1 December 2010 and 15 December 2010, Respondents 1 to 28 are alleged to have exe