Amendment for the plaint at what stage and what nature

Your problem is that you engaged lawyer who himself was not sure what sort of civil suit he was filling for you, without ascertaining the nature of property he filled suit for partition mentioning it as joint Hindu family property whereas as now you say it was self acquired property. This do happens when you engage inexperienced lawyer and save money.

Sir, I do agree on the part of forgery and with your guidance and feedback from this forum I have already withdrawn section of 191, 192 and 193 from my case. Thanks for this help.

Now coming back to the amendment, I am not related to the family. I am the third party and defendent to the case. Let me explain the history of property and the case in short.

One person bought two properties A and B somewhere in 1960-70. That person died in 1998 leaving two wives and their children’s. In 2001 both of the wife’s family separated out and it was decided that scheduled ‘A’ property will go to second wife and scheduled ‘B’ property will go to first wife. NOC was given to BBMP by all the family members except one married daughter of first wife who was married in 1994. Katha was transfer accordingly to the wives name. All records are available.  

In 2006 I bought the Scheduled ‘A’ property from second wife and her legal hires and since then I am in possession. In 2014 Married daughter filed a case calming her share in both properties stating that it is her copersonery properties and she and her brothers and sister (Including the family of second wife ) are in HUF and this HUF is in possession of these propertie.

 As explained above I have filed first IA to object on court fee stating that these properties are not HUF joint family property nither in the joint possession of this HUF. Court has rejected my IA by going by the averments in the plaint by concluding that the suit is filed for partition & separate possession from the joint family property of Hindu Undivided family hence court fee paid is sufficient.

In 2016 I filed another IA which is accepted by the court that since father was not alive in 2005 hence she can’t have right over the scheduled properties. Her plaint was rejected.

She has challenged the order of IA in High Court now saying that it is self-acquired property of her father and she is entitled to the share whereas earlier stand was different.

I am expecting that she will move the amendment to the plaint and change her case. 

This is the state of the case as of now. I wanted to ask that can she amend the plaint with such shift in her stand. Will it change the nature of the case where court will not allow her to change the plaint?

 Let me know if you need any further details. 

No, It was a self-acquired property bought by her father one in 1960 and other in 1970. These properties after purchase he paid the regular tax from his own income. It was never put in the hotchpotch of HUF but daughter has filed the case saying that it is HUF property and she and her family is in joint possession of these properties. Case was filed in 2014.  

The case was filed with the intention to harass me as third party so that I can come for settlement and they can squeeze the money from me.

My lawyer opinion is also that the properties are the self-acquired properties and the case was filed for the joint family properties which was not correct.

Because of this litigation, I started studying properties law and various judgements related to that to understand on different aspects so that I can fill the gap if in case anything is missed out from lawyer side. At least to support him in discussion with varios judgements/rules since they have so many cases and do not even sometimes get time to go throught various aspects. For that reason, I take a help of this forum to understand certain points to get the direction.   

I was reading some of the judgements of High Courts/Supreme Court about amendment of the plaint. Some of the judgements amendments was accepted and some of them has defined the rules but it again depends upon the circumstances of the case. I have certain queries so that when I read the judgements I can understand the detials clearly.

1. In this case if amendment is filed to change the plaint in High Court. Can court allow the amendment to change the plaint from HUF properties to self-acquired properties? Does it not change the nature of the suit and the prayer? Trial was not started since case was dismissed before trial. Rule says that before trial amendment can be filed at any stage. I did not get any judgement which says if case is disposed before trial than amendment can not be filed. 
2. Will it be not then time barred because it is 4 years that case was filed and now if she files application to change the plaint that it was self-acquired properties.
3. How may time amendment can be filed. She has filed one amendment to add one paragraph and small correction which was allowed long ago. Is there any rule where amendment can be filed again and again. 

Can you help me with some relevant citations which can help me in such situation. 

  

 

interpleader section will not be applicable here. Though few defendants has filed false statement in support of plaintiff but main dispute is still with the plaintiff.  

Just very specific question: 

In case of amendment of plant: I as defendant and third party in the case and property is in my possession from past 12 years through valid sale deed. And if plaintiff apply for amendment at this stage of the plaint to change HUF property of her father to the self acquired property. Will time limitation of law will come in to picture and block such amendment which is the new institution of the case.