The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's power under Order XIV Rule 5 of the CPC to amend issues necessary for determining the matters in controversy between the parties.

ORDER

Chandra Dhari Singh, J. (Oral)

I.A. No. 19161/2022

1. The present application under Order XIV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "the CPC") has been filed by the plaintiffs seeking the following prayers:

"a) Allow the present application of the plaintiffs under Order 14 Rule 5 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure and direct the following issue to be framed as additional issue No. (iii) "Whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to a decree of mesne profits from the date of filing of the present suit till the defendants remain in continuous occupation of the entire suit property?"

b) Pass any such other or further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to protect the right of the plaintiffs/applicants."

2. The issues in the captioned suit were framed by the predecessor Bench of this Court vide Order dated 22nd September, 2016. The said issues are reproduced hereunder:

"(i) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to a declaration that they are the owner of 50% share in the suit property bearing plot no.146, Pocket-1, Jasola Residential Scheme, Jasola, New Delhi? OPP

(ii) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to a decree for recovery of sum of Rs.19,25,000/- towards damages for use and occupation for the period of February, 2007 upto the date of filing the present suit? OPP

(iii) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to a decree of possession in respect of the suit property bearing plot no.146, Pocket-1, Jasola Residential Scheme, Jasola, New Delhi? OPP

(iv) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to permanent injunction, as prayed for? OPP

(v) Whether the suit is barred by limitation? OPD

(vi) What is the total cost of construction/development of suit Property? Onus on the parties

(vii) What was the total amount invested by the plaintiffs on the construction/development of the suit property?

Onus on the parties

(viii) Whether the defendants are entitled to 73% of the sale proceeds of the suit property as stated in the written statement? OPD

(ix) Relief."

3. Furthermore, this Court vide order dated 11th July, 2017 framed two additional issues. The said additional issues framed are reproduced hereunder:

"(i) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to a decree of rendition of accounts towards the amounts spent on development and construction of the suit prope1ty i.e. construction of basement, Ground Floor, First Floor and Second Floor upon the property bearing plot No. 146, Pocket- I, Jasola Residential Scheme, Jasola, New Delhi till December 2006? OPP (ii) Whether the suit has been properly valued for the purpose of Court fee and wether the plaintiffs are entitled to decree of rendition of accounts in the absence of non-valuation of the said relief? OPP"

Submissions on behalf of the plaintiff

4. It has been submitted on behalf of the plaintiff that the plaintiffs are the lawful owners of 50% share of the property bearing plot no.146, Pocket I, Jasola Residential Scheme, Jasola, New Delhi. The suit property was jointly allotted to the plaintiffs and defendants by way of auction tendered by the Delhi Development Authority (in short 'DDA') on 28th August, 2002 for valuable consideration for sum of Rs.47.26 lakhs and the possession of the suit property was jointly delivered to the plaintiff and defendants by way of registered lease deed dated 12th December, 2003.

5. It has been further submitted that the lease deed dated 12th December, 2003 was jointly registered in favour of plaintiff No.1 and 2 and defendants No.1 and 2 as joint lessees.

6. It has been submitted on behalf of the plaintiff that in October, 2005 the parties initiated construction on the suit property utilizing their joint funds and efforts in line with the site plan duly sanctioned by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA).

7. It has been submitted that a joint account was opened in order to keep a track of the expenses incurred on the said construction. It is further submitted that despite the property being in semi-finished