IMPORTANT POINT
Amendments to pleadings are to be allowed liberally to determine the real controversy, provided they do not change the nature of the suit or introduce time-barred claims.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. By this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner questions the order dtd. 20/10/2022 allowing the amendment application preferred by respondent No.1-original Plaintiff in Special Civil Suit No.223 of 2018.

2. The Petitioners herein are the original Defendant Nos 1 and 2, the Respondent No 1 is the original Plaintiff and the Respondent Nos 2 and 3 are the original Defendant Nos.3 and 4. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to by their status before the trial Court.

3. The factual matrix is as under:

Special Civil Suit no 223 of 2018 was instituted seeking the following reliefs :

"(a) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to declare that the Conveyance Deed dtd. 29/4/2017 executed by and between Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 is illegal, null and/or void ab initio and of no legal effect ;

(b) for an order and decree of this Hon'ble Court directing the Defendants to deliver up the original Conveyance Deed dtd. 29/4/2017 executed by and between Defendant Nos.1to 4 and to cancel and invalidate the same;

(c) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to declare that all actions taken by the Defendants pursuant to the Conveyance Deed dtd. 29/4/2017 are illegal, null and void and of no legal consequence;

(d) for a mandatory order and injunction of this Hon'ble Court directing Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 to do all acts, deeds and matters and things as may be necessary to amalgamate Plot Nos. 4/1 and 4/2 into a single undivided Plot No.4 as per the plan annexed at Annexure 3 to the MOU, and for such purpose, direct Defendant nos. 1 to 4 do all acts and take all steps as may be necessary for amalgamation;

(e) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass an order for a mandatory injunction restraining the Defendants, whether by by themselves or through their directors, officers, servants and agents from acting pursuant to the Conveyance Deed dtd. 29/4/2017 in any manner whatsoever;

(f) the said Defendant Nos 1 and 2 be ordered and decreed to pay to the Plaintiff a sum of Rs.45, 00, 00, 000.00 (Rupees Forty Five Crores only) alongwith interest thereon at the rate of 18% p.a. or at such other rate as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper from the date of filing of the present Suit till the date of payment and realisation thereof as per the Particulars of Claim as produced on record of this Hon'ble Court along with the list of documents;"

4. The case of plaintiff is that defendant nos.1 to 4, in connivance with one another and in violation of the terms of Court order dtd. 14/10/2014, have revised the layout, subdivided the suit property and executed a deed of conveyance dtd. 29/4/2017 in relation to a disproportionate portion of the sub-divided suit property to the exclusion of plaintiff and behind its back, in order to defeat the plaintiff's right title and interest in the suit property. The suit property is described in paragraph 4 of the plaint is the land forming plot no.4 as detailed in Schedule-II.

5. The factual narration in the plaint is :

* Defendant no.2 had executed a development agreement on 20/3/2002 in favour of defendant no.1 in respect of the land described in Schedule-I which is referred to as "the said larger land" and after obtaining sanction from Pune Municipal Corporation for the master layout of the said larger land, the said larger land was divided in 4 plots, namely, Plot nos.1 to 4. * Defendant no.1 has carried out construction of various residential bungalows and buildings on the suit property and had thereafter sold those bungalows and flats to individual purchasers who are the members of 3 societies. As in the year 2014, dispute arose between 3 societies on one hand and defendant no.1 and 2 on the other hand, in relation to the proposed revisions sought to be made to the layout plan of the said larger land, the said 3 societies as co-plaintiffs had filed a suit being Regular Civil Suit No.441 of 2014. In the suit of 2014, the plaintiff herein and defendant nos.1 to 4 entered into a co