HC - Amendment of petition to furnish better particulars is permissible

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT HYDERABAD

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY

CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.562, 563, 564, 565, 566 AND 567 
OF 2012

THATIKONDA ADINARAYANA RAO

VS

KARANAM VARAHALU & ANOTHER

COMMON ORDER:

          All the revisions are filed against the same respondents.  Hence, they are disposed of through a common order.  

2.  The petitioners filed O.S. No.72 of 2007 and batch in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam, for the relief of perpetual injunction , as regards respective suit schedule properties, against the 1^st respondent (1^st defendant in each of the suits).  The 
2^nd respondent is said to be his vendor and no substantial relief is claimed against him.  During the pendency of the suits, the petitioners filed applications being I.A. No.99 of 2010 and batch under Rule - 17 of Order - VI CPC, with a prayer to permit them to add one paragraph in the plaint and supplement certain particulars as to the description of the properties.  The emphasis was to incorporate the corresponding new survey numbers and other similar particulars.  The applications were opposed by the 1^st defendant in each of the suits. 

          3.  The trial Court dismissed the applications through separate orders, dated 18-08-2011.  Hence, this batch of revisions.

          4.  Heard Sri V.L.N.G.K. Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioners.  Though the respondents in each of the revisions served with notice, they have not entered appearance much less have filed counter – affidavits.

          5.  The suits, as mentioned above, are for the relief of perpetual injunction.  The property was mentioned with certain particulars, viz., Survey No.8/3.  However, the petitioners came to know that new survey number 8/3 C was given to the properties in question.  To bring that fact into the plaint, they wanted to incorporate para-III (g) and to amend the concluding portion of the plaints.  This is not the case where any new cause of action is sought to be incorporated nor complexion of the suit is sought to be changed.  Furnishing better particulars in respect of the suit schedule properties would be helpful not only to the parties, but also to the Court for an effective adjudication of the suits. 

          6.  The correctness or otherwise of the particulars now sought to be supplemented can certainly be agitated by the 1^st defendant in the respective suits. 

          7.  Hence, the Civil Revision Petitions are allowed and the orders under revision are set aside, as a result the applications filed for amendment of the plaints shall stand allowed. It is left open to the 
1^st defendant in each of the suits to file additional written statement, if he so advised. 

         

8.  The miscellaneous petition filed in the revision petitions also stands disposed of. 

_______________________

L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J

September 27, 2012.

KTL