ORDER :

This civil revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, by the unsuccessful defendants is directed against the orders dated 08.09.2021, of the Family Court-cum-VI Additional District Judge, Kadapa, dismissing IA.No.149 of 2021 in OS.No.29 of 2014 filed under Order VI Rule 17 CPC seeking to amend the plaint.

2. Heard Sri G.V.S. Kishore Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners/defendants and Smt. M. Siva Jyothi, learned 1st counsel for respondent/plaintiff. The other respondents are shown as proforma parties.

3. The case of the revision petitioners, in brief, is that the plaintiff brought the suit against the defendants for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties into four shares and for allotment of one such share to him by taking into good and bad qualities of the properties and in case the defendants fail to extend their cooperation, the same may be done through due process of law. The 1st respondent being the head of the family, while managing the joint family affairs, purchased several items of properties for the benefit including the interest of the joint family and for the benefit of the respondents by obtaining necessary documents. However, the entire properties purchased by him for the benefit of the joint family were not included in the schedule items of the properties for making them available for partition along with the suit schedule properties. The 1st respondent being the head of the family did not choose to add all the joint family properties for partition. The trial in the suit was commenced. The 1st respondent/plaintiff was examined as PW1. PW1 was cross-examined at length and after closure of the evidence of PW1, the 2nd defendant was examined and certain documents were marked. Learned counsel for the 1st respondent/plaintiff cross-examined the 2nd defendant at length. The chief affidavit of 4th defendant was filed as DW2 and she is yet to be examined in chief as well as cross-examination.

(b) The main plea taken in the written statement filed on behalf of the defendants is that 1st respondent/plaintiff did not include all the joint family properties for partition. The properties which were not included are shown in the counter claim. On enquiries, the defendants came to know that the 1st respondent purchased the property on 15.04.1985 with joint family nucleus while maintaining the joint family for its benefit. The property purchased was situated at Balaji Nagar, Kadapa town lying within the village fields of Chemmumiyapeta grampanchayat in an extent of Ac.0.10 cents situated in Sy.No.601/4 out of Ac.0.70 cents. The 1st respondent/ plaintiff deliberately omitted to show this property in the schedule for partition. After coming to know of the fact on 26.02.2021, they obtained certified copy of the same under document No.2235/1985. If this item of property is not included in the counter claim properties, the defendants suffer irreparable loss and hardship. The delay in filing the petition is not willful and intentional.

(c) As the defendants are making counter claim including the petition schedule properties as additional item of property along with counter claim made properties, it has become necessary for the defendants to carry out necessary amendments in the written statement and also seek consequential amendments wherever necessary. Hence, this petition.

(d) The proposed amendments sought for by the defendants are as follows:

“1. Add Para No.8 in the written statement filed on behalf of the defendants No.1 to 3 as sub-para No.B

It is submitted that these defendants came to know about the availability of 11th item as shown in the counter claim made particulars of the properties only on 26.02.2021

when these defendants got obtained the certified copy of the sale deed dated 15.04.1985 vide document No.2235/1985 through which the plaintiff purchased the 11th item of counter claim made property being the head of the joint family for the benefit