ORDER :- These are two applications taken out by the plaintiff. One is an appeal against the order of the Master refusing leave to amend the plaint and the other is for leave to sue on the basis of the plaint sought to be amended.

2. The suit is for specific performance of a contract for the sale of certain lands in Salem District entered into at Madras, and for an injunction restraining the second defendant from bringing about a breach of the said contract. Application No. 260 of 1951 was filed by the plaintiff for amendment of the plaint consequent on the plaintiff having been made aware subsequent to the suit that the second defendant claimed to be purchaser of the same property under a sale deed executed in his favour on the 28th September 1950. The plaint is, therefore, sought to be amended by stating that the sale is sham and nominal, and, in any event, the second defendant is not a bona fide purchaser for value without notice, and for directing the execution of the sale deed not only by the first defendant, but also by the second defendant.

3. The application was opposed on the grounds that the amendment could not be allowed, as it substantially alters the cause of ac