ORDER :

1. This civil revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed challenging the orders, dated 02.11.2022, dismissing I.A. No. 616 of 2020 in O.S. No. 363 of 1998 on the file of the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tadepalligudem, filed under Section 26(2), (4) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, and Order 2 Rule 2 CPC read with Rule 28 of the Civil Rules of Practice read with Section 151 CPC seeking the following prayer:

“For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit the petitioner No. 3/plaintiff No. 3 respectfully prays the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to permit the rectification of the instrument to cure the fraud or mistake so as to express the intention of the parties thereto only and to permit to amend the plaint for additional claim under the Specific Relief Act under Section 26(2), (4) in respect of wrong recitals at south boundary of defendant Nos.1 and 2’s title deed in Ex.A18 and also the recital of north boundary of petitioner’s title deed in Ex.A12 in Schedule-IV of property as there will not be any prejudice caused to the rights acquired by the parties thereto as there is no change in measurements and extents of the property and the same is essential in adjudication of my whole case in the interest of justice or else petitioner will suffer irreparable loss and damage which can’t be compensated at a later date and to grant orders for the following amendments in the plaint.

Consequential amendments (under Rule 28 of Civil Rules of Practice)

1. To add the following Para 11C, after Para 11B:

“11C. The intention of the Ex.A-18 document is for a transfer of property for 281.3 sq. yards including North side rajaveedhi, in R.S. No. 120 in between the respondents 1 and 2 and their vendors. Whereas it being a deed of our north boundary land, a fraud is played to encroach my site with a south boundary recital as “panta bodi” and I am entitled, as a third party effected, to seek for the remedy of rectification of their south boundary recital instead of “panta bodi” as “R.S. No. 121/1” through courts of equity.

And

In petitioner title deed Ex.A-12 also the north boundary recital, of iv schedule “panta bodi” is a misnomer of “aari cheruvu neeti valu” which is replaced with an altogether through a different course bodi through my site and it is the unfilled channel out of the channels from culverts No. 5 and 6 of midlevel canal that passes through north of Pentapadu.

In view of the fraudulent south boundary recital “panta bodi” in the respondents document and also of the mistake of North boundary recital as “panta bodi” in my document Ex.A-12; a direction for rectification of the wrong recital in Ex.a-12, iv schedule North boundary recital, instead of “panta bodi” as “R.S. No. 120” is essential in the interest of justice.

(II) To add the valuation of the relief, Para 13(a2), (a3) below Para 13(a1)

“13(a2) The relief of rectification of north boundary recital in Ex.A12

On the cost of the site at the time of registration Rs. 6000/-

¾ of 6000 is 4500, a court fee of Rs. 381/-

13(a3) The relief of rectification of south boundary recital in Ex.A-18 On the cost of the site at the time of registration Rs. 4500/-

¾ of 4500 is 3,375, a court fee of Rs. 291/- (a court fee of Rs. 672/- under relief 13 (a2, a3) is being paid herewith under Schedule-1, Art 1C of APCF and SV Act) Rs. 672/-

(III) To add the prayer 14(a1), (a2) below 14a

14(a1) For the order of rectification of north boundary recital in Ex.A12 in iv schedule in place “panta bodi” as “R.S. No. 120.”

14(a2) For the order of rectification of south boundary recital in Ex. A-18 in schedule in place of “panta bodi” as “R.S. No. 121/1.”

2. The suit is filed for the following reliefs:

(a) For a declaration that the plaintiffs is the owner of the plaint schedule property with absolute rights and for consequential vacant possession of the same.

(b) For a mandatory injunction directing the defendants to remove all constructi