The Court's decision emphasized that the amendment sought did not change the property mentioned in the Plaint and that no prejudice would be caused to the Petitioners by allowing the amendment, citing relevant legal provisions and case law.

1. The Petitioner in the above C.R.P are the Defendants in O.S. No. 599 of 2004 and the Respondents in R.E.P. No. 125 of 2007 and R.E.P. No.308 of 2008 on the file of the District Munsif Court Gobichettipalayam.

2. The Respondent herein, on the basis of a Sale Agreement dated 28.8.2003 said to have been executed by the Petitioners herein filed O.S. No.599 of 2004 before the District Munsif Court, Gobichettipalayam seeking a decree for specific performance of the Agreement of Sale.

3. Though the Petitioners/Defendant filed a Written Statement, they were set ex-parte and an ex-parte decree was passed on 21.4.2007. On 24.11.2008 the Respondent herein filed E.P. No. 125 of 2007 as the Petitioners failed to execute the Sale Deed as per the Decree.

4. The Execution Petition was contested by the Petitioners herein. As directed by the Executing Court a draft Sale Deed was filed by the Respondent and as there was no objection by the Petitioners, the same was approved by the Court and thereafter a fair Sale Deed was filed by the Respondent and the same was sent to the office of the sub-Registrar for registration. The Sub-Registrar returned the Sale Deed as certain particulars were not mentioned in t he schedule of the property.

5. In such circumstances, the Respondent filed E.A. No. 308 of 2008 purportedly under Order 6, Rule 17, and Section 151, C.P.C on 27.8.2008 seeking to amend the schedule in the Execution Petition, draft Sale Deed and fair Sale Deed.

6. The amendment sought for was to include the following particulars namely Town survey Ward: B

Block: 39 T.A. No: 4

Old Survey No: 194/A Part Extent: 0.00.62 sq mt

7. In the Affidavit filed in support of the E.A. it is stated that at the time of entering into the Agreement of Sale as well as obtaining the decree, the Respondent was not aware of the particulars now sought to be included by way of amendment which should have been included in the schedule. Only when the Sale Deed was sent to the office of the Sub-Registrar for registration the Sub-Registrar returned the Sale Deed for including the aforesaid details.

8. In such circumstances the Petition is being filed to amend the Execution Petition, draft Sale Deed and the fair Sale Deed. By allowing the amendment nature of the Petition, and the case of action will not be changed. If the amendment sought for is not allowed, great hardship will be caused to the Respondent whereas no hardship will be caused to the Petitioners.

9. The Petitioners herein contested the E.A. by filing a Counter Affidavit inter alia contending as follows:

a. The reasons stated for seeking amendment are not correct the sale agreement was not executed with an intention to sell the property; the singed blank stamp papers entrusted by the Petitioners as security for the loan obtained by them from the Respondent had been used to create the sale agreement and that was the reason the T.S. No. Block No. etc were not mentioned in the Sale Agreement without seeking the amendment of the Plaint and the decree, it is not open to the Respondent to seek for amendment of the Execution Petition draft Sale Deed and fair Sale Deed. It was further contended that the extent now sought to be included is larger than the extent mentioned in the Plaint.

10. On a consideration of the rival contentions, the Court below allowed the amendment sought for holding that it is not the contention of the judgment-debtors by allowing the amendment different property than the one mentioned in the Plaint will be sold and the Petition has been filed only to add the particulars which were omitted to be mentioned in the Plaint.

11. Being aggrieved by that, the Judgment debtors are before this Court.

12. Heard both.

13. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners made the following submissions.

A. No acceptable reasons have been stated in the Affidavit filed in support of the Amendment Petition for seeking the amendment.

b. Unless the proposed amendment is carried out in the Agreement of Sale, Pl