1. Against the orders dated 07.12.2015 and 08.01.2016 passed in dismissing the three applications filed in I.A.Nos.1446, 1447 and 1449 of 2015 respectively, that were filed by the revision petitioner under Order VI Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the plaint in O.S.No.509 of 2012 and the written statements respectively in O.S.Nos.106 of 2009 and 507 of 2012, the three revision petitions are maintained.

2. The parties in these three revision petitions are almost one and the same (to be detailed below) and therefrom at request of the learned counsel for the parties, all the three revision petitions are taken up for common hearing and disposal.

3. Coming to the relevant factual background:

(a) The revision petitioner in all the three revisions by name Smt. M. Seetharatnam is the Plaintiff in O.S.No.509 of 2012 and 2nd defendant in O.S.Nos.160 of 2009 & 507 of 2012 respectively. From the above, the suit of revision petitioner-plaintiff in O.S.No.509 of 2012 is first in point of time filed as O.S.No.633 of 2000 before its renumbering on transfer supra.

(b) She filed the suit O.S.No.633 of 2000 and same while pending on the file of 5th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, transfe