JUDGMENT

Shree Chandrashekhar, J. - The petitioner who is defendant in Eviction Suit No. 08 of 1984 is aggrieved of order dated 28.02.2014 by which amendment in the plaint has been permitted by the appellate Court.

2. Plea urged on behalf of the defendant is that about 30 years after the suit was instituted, amendment in the plaint cannot be permitted.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that not only there was inordinate delay in seeking amendment in the plaint, the matter has travelled to this Court previously and while so, the parties must be bound by their initial pleadings.

4. Initially, Eviction Suit No. 08 of 1984 was decreed vide judgment dated 17.08.1985, however, on the petition of the defendant which was registered as Civil Revision No. 378 of 1985 (R) the judgment dated 17.08.1985 passed in Eviction Suit No. 08 of 1984 was set-aside and the matter was remanded back to the trial Judge. Now, the suit has been dismissed and the plaintiff has preferred Eviction Appeal No. 02 of 2012. The plaintiff has laid a claim over the suit property by virtue of a registered sale-deed dated 18.08.1980. The plaintiff has pleaded that he has purchased the house along with the