https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196649 The High Court set aside the order allowing the plaintiffs to amend the plaint to include a claim for specific performance of contract and possession of the property. The Court found that the plaintiffs did not demonstrate due diligence in filing the amendment application, as the proposed changes altered the nature and cause of action of the original suit. Additionally, the suit for specific performance of contract was barred by limitation under the Limitation Act, as the proposed amendment did not include material facts to bring it within the limitation period. The application for amendment was ultimately rejected. en-us Wed, 25 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Dec 2017 13:21:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196649 The High Court set aside the order allowing the plaintiffs to amend the plaint to include a claim for specific performance of contract and possession of the property. The Court found that the plaintiffs did not demonstrate due diligence in filing the amendment application, as the proposed changes altered the nature and cause of action of the original suit. Additionally, the suit for specific performance of contract was barred by limitation under the Limitation Act, as the proposed amendment did not include material facts to bring it within the limitation period. The application for amendment was ultimately rejected. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 25 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196649