( 1 ) THIS application has been moved under Order 14, rule 5 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure ( code for short) on behalf of the defendant alleging that in para 28 of the written statement a plea bad been specifically taken that this Court had no jurisdiction because the suit was for specific performance of the Contract with respect to the land situated in the State of Uttar Pradesh. Therefore, it has been prayed that additional issue to that effect may be framed.

( 2 ) PLAINTIFF has contested thispplication by filing a reply. I have heard arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submitted that since such an issue was not pressed at the time of framing of the issues, the defendant noe could not come forward to say that the framing of such an issue at the. time of settlement of issues was not pressed under some misconception or erroneous legal advice. He has cited three authorities, namely, Hira Lal Patni v. Sri Kali Nath, air 1962 SC 199, Behrein Petroleum Co. Ltd. v. P. J. Puppu and Anr, AIR 1966 SC 634 and Associated Hotels of India Ltd. v. S. B. Sardar Ranjit Singh, AIR 1968 SC 938 =4 (1968) DLT (SC) 1