Order No. 17                                    Date : 27-8-2014.

          Ld. Lawyers of both sides are present. The petition for amendment of the complaint is taken up for hearing.

Seen the petition.  

Heard the ld. lawyers.

Considered.

          On scrutiny of the record it appears that the deed with respect to the flat in question was executed and registered on 06-05-2010 in favour of the wife of the complainant Putul Mondal who is in the category of o.p. no. 5. Curiously enough in spite of the knowledge of such execution of the deed which is the bone of contention, the petitioner Mantu Mondal filed this complaint on 11-07-2013 i.e., after nearly three years of the date of registration.

          Now the complainant who did not come before this  Forum with clean hands has preferred this petition under O. 6  r.17  C.P. Code with a  proposal for amendment in the prayer portion as it suits his purpose.

          When the deed in question has been executed in favour of his wife, and which fact was very much in the knowledge of the complainant, we are of the view that the instant complaint is  not maintainable in the eye of law as the relief as prayed for has lost his force. We are not concerned if the relation between the complainant and the o.p. no. 5 has been estranged for the reasons best known to them.

          Instead of filing an appropriate suit before the appropriate forum for revocation of the deed, the complainant has preferred this Forum only to hoodwink the Bench of this Forum.

           Therefore, the Complaint being no. 227 of 2013 is dismissed not being maintainable in the eye of law.       

Member.                    Member.              President.