IMPORTANT POINT
Principle of estoppel applies only when order is a conditional order and payment of costs is a condition precedent to allowing petition – An order cannot be adopted for one purpose and then challenged for another purpose.

ORDER

Heard Sri M.Madhava Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashok Reddy Kanathala, learned counsel appearing for 1st respondent. Respondents 2 to 15 are not necessary parties and the same is also mentioned by learned counsel for the petitioner in the cause title.

2. This Civil Revision Petition is filed to set aside the order dated 10.06.2021 passed in I.A.No.463 of 2013 in O.S.No.242 of 2008 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Warangal.

3. 1st respondent/plaintiff filed a suit vide O.S.No.242 of 2008 seeking partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property therein. During the pendency of the suit, 1st respondent/plaintiff filed I.A.No.463 of 2013 under Order XVI Rule 17 read with 151of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ( for short, ‘CPC’) seeking permission to amend the plaint with regard to addition of lands covered in Sy.Nos.310, 311, 315, 240 and 241 of Regonda Village and also to carry out consequential amendments.

4. The said application was filed contending that apart from the suit schedule lands, the plaintiff and defendants have also succeeded the lands in Sy.Nos.310, 311, 315, 240 and 241 of Regonda Village admeasuring Ac.17.07 guntas situated at Regonda Village and Mandal, Warangal District. The petitioner herein/1st defendant, brother of plaintiff, looking after the said agricultural affairs. Therefore, the petitioner herein never enquired into the details of the said land at Regonda Village. Due to the said reasons, he has not included the aforesaid properties in the schedule of O.S.No.242 of 2008.

5. Whereas, the said application was opposed by the petitioner herein on the ground that he got the land to an extent of Ac.10.33 guntas in Sy.No.240, 241, 312/B and 313 of Regonda Village, as per the family arrangement deed dated 28.05.1993 and the same is exclusively in possession of the petitioner herein and the same is also mutated in his name in the revenue records. The said family settlement deed is effected in 1993 itself. The plaintiff got his share in Regonda Village lands as per the family arrangement deed dated 28.05.1993. He sold the said land for his family necessities long back and he put his evil eye on the lands fallen to the share of 1st defendant and filed the present petition.

6. The Court below, vide order dated 10.02.2021 allowed the said application on the ground that the said lands in Sy.Nos. 310, 311 and 315 of Regonda Village, now sought to be added are not reflecting in Exs.R.1 to R.5 and even if it is done, no prejudice would be caused to the defendants. Moreover, it would be helpful to the parties to determine their rights finally. The Court below allowed the said application on imposition of costs of Rs.2,000/- and also on the condition of carrying out necessary amendments and filing of neat copy within two weeks from the date of the order, failing which, the said petition shall stand dismissed.

7. Feeling aggrieved by the said order dated 10.06.2021 in I.A.No.463 of 2013 in O.S.No.248 of 2008, the petitioner/defendant No.1 filed I.A.No.438 of 2021 to delete Sy.Nos.240 and 241 to an extent of Ac.8-17 guntas from the amendment carried out in the plaint since it is not in accordance with the orders passed in I.A.No.463 of 2013 dated 10.06.2021. Vide order dated 07.03.2022, the court below passed the following order in I.A.No.438 of 2021:-

Heard both. As per the order dated 10.06.2021, this Court allowed the amendment for inclusion of Sy.Nos.310, 311 and 315 but the learned counsel for the plaintiff inadvertently included the Sy.Nos. 240 and 241.

Hence, the plaintiff counsel is hereby directed to strike out Sy.Nos.340 and 341 in the amendment as well as neat copy of plaint.

8. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the plaintiff filed revision vide CRP No.1164 of 2022. This Court vide order dated 29.08.2022 allowed the revision, setting aside the order passed in I.A.No.438 of 2021 in I.A.No.463 of 2013 in O.S.No.242 of 2008 passed by Principal Senior Civil Judge at