This Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 23.6.2008 in I.A.No.304 of 2008 in O.S.No.25 of 2007 on the file of the Court of the IV- Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Kadapa.

2. The revision petitioner is the plaintiff who filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants/respondents herein from interfering with the suit schedule property. The defendants contested the suit and on the basis of the pleadings issues were settled. Both the parties let in evidence in support of their respective claims. However, after the closure of the evidence, at the instance of the plaintiff the trial was reopened for examining P.W.4. At that stage, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.304 of 2008 under Order 23 Rule 1 (3) of C.P.C. seeking permission to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit in respect of the same subject matter on the ground that there was a formal defect in the suit and therefore he was advised by his counsel to file a fresh suit. The said application was opposed by the defendants/respondents herein and the Court below by order dated 23.6.2008 dismissed the application. Challenging the said order dated 23.6.2008, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed by the Plaintiff.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material on record.

4. Order 23 Rule 1 of C.P.C. which provides for withdrawal of suit or abandonment of part of claim runs as under :

"1.Withdrawal of suit or abandonment of part of claim (1) At any time after the institution of suit, the plaintiff may as against all or any of the defendants abandon his suit or abandon a part of his claim :

PROVIDED that where the plaintiff is a minor or other person to whom the provisions contained in rules 1 to 4 14 of Order XXXII extend, neither the suit nor any part of the claim shall be abandoned without the leave of the court.

(2) An application for leave under the proviso to sub-rule (1) shall be accompanied by an affidavit of the next friend and also, if the minor or such other person is represented by a pleader, by a certificate of the pleader to the effect that the abandonment proposed is, in his opinion, for the benefit of the minor or such other person.

(3) Where the court is satisfied,--

(a) that a suit must fail by reason of some formal defect, or

(b) that there are sufficient grounds for allowing the plaintiff to institute a fresh suit for the subject matter of a suit or part of a claim,

it may, on such terms as it thinks fit, grant the plaintiff permission to withdraw from such suit or such part of the claim with liberty to institute a fresh suit in respect of the subject matter of such suit or such part of the claim.

(4) Where the plaintiff,--

(a) abandons any suit or part of claim under sub-rule (1), or

(b) withdraws from a suit or part of a claim without the permission referred to in sub-rule (3),

he shall be liable for such costs as the court may award and shall be precluded from instituting any fresh suit in respect of such subject matter or such part of the claim.

(5) Nothing in this rule shall be deemed to authorize the court to permit one of several plaintiffs to abandon a suit or part of a claim under sub- rule (1), or to withdraw, under sub-rule (3), any suit or part of a claim, without the consent of the other plaintiffs.

1A. When transposition of defendants as plaintiffs may be permitted Where a suit is withdrawn or abandoned by a plaintiff under rule 1, and a defendant applies to be transposed as a plaintiff under rule 10 of Order 1, the court shall, in considering such application, have due regard to the question whether the applicant has a substantial question to be decided as against any of the other defendants."

5. On a reading of the above provision, it is clear that under sub-rule (1) of Rule 1, it is open to the plaintiff to abandon the suit or abandon a part of his claim at any time after the institution of a suit against all or any of the defendants. However, if the plaintiff in