C. V. N. SASTRY, J.

( 1 ) HEARD the learned Counsel on both sides.

( 2 ) THESE two revisions can be disposed of by a common order since theyarise out of the same suit. C. R. P. No. 4813 of 1997 is filed by the defendants questioning the order passed by the lower Court allowing an application filed by the plaintiff for amendment of the plaint. The other revision is filed by the plaintiff questioning a docket order dated 22-8-1997 holding that the memorandum of partition sought to be tendered by the plaintiff in evidence is not admissible.

( 3 ) THE suit is filed for declaration of title and for possession of the plaintschedule property on the plea that the suit property fell to the share of the plaintiff in an oral partition between him and his brothers and that the defendants trespassed into the same. However, in the plaint neither the date of the alleged oral partition nor the date of the alleged trespass by the defendants was mentioned and the relevant portions in the plaint were kept blank. The suit was filed in the year 1990. The trial commenced in 1996. The evidence on the plaintiff s side commenced on 27-8-1996 and it was closed on 27-12-1996 after examining five witnesses. Th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document