The court emphasized strict adherence to limitation periods for amendments in civil suits and the necessity of including all consequential amendments as per procedural rules.

ORDER :

B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO, J.

1. This Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order passed by the learned XXVII Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Secunderabad in IA.No.792 of 2015 in OS.No.128 of 2007, dated 04.03.2022.

2. Petitioner is the respondent No.4-defendant No.4, respondent No.1 is the petitioner-plaintiff, respondent No.2 is respondent No.1-defendant No.1 in IA.No.792 of 2015 in OS.No.128 of 2007.

3. It is mentioned in the cause title of the CRP that respondent Nos.3 to 6-respondent Nos.2, 3, 5 and 6-defendant Nos.2, 3, 5 and 6 are not necessary parties.

4.1. Respondent No.1-petitioner stated in the affidavit (i.e. in IA.No.792 of 2015) that during the lift time of his mother (respondent No.2-defendant No.1) and before her demise, after filing the suit, defendant No.4 (petitioner herein) got executed various gift deeds involving most of the properties in his favour and to give a belief that he is making a fair play, got executed few gift deeds in favour of defendant Nos.2, 3, 5 and 6 (respondent Nos.3 to 6 herein) disproportionately when his mother was mentally and physically unstable to misappropriate much of the assets of the family and to deprive the rights of the plaintiff (i.e., respondent No.1-petitioner). Defendant Nos.2 to 6 (respondent Nos.3, 4, petitioner, respondent Nos.5 and 6 herein) got executed the following deeds:

4.2. Without the knowledge of respondent No.1-petitioner all the manipulation is the brainchild of defendant No.4 (petitioner herein) to knock away the properties and he came to know about the gift deeds recently and sought to declare them as not binding on him consequently to declare them as null and void. If the application is not allowed seeking cancellation of the gift settlement deeds, respondent No.1-petitioner-plaintiff will be put to irreparable loss and damage and prayed to declare the gift deeds executed in favour of defendant Nos.2 to 6 as null and void and consequently to declare the same as not binding on respondent No.1-petitioner-plaintiff.

5. Petitioner-respondent No.4 has filed counter and contended that respondent No.1-petitioner-plaintiff is having knowledge about the gift settlement deeds on 08.02.2008 when defendant No.1 (respondent No.2 herein) has filed her written statement, all the gift deeds were already furnished to the counsel for respondent No.1- petitioner-plaintiff before the trial Court and after lapse of 7 ½ years respondent No.1-petitioner-plaintiff cannot seek declaration to declare the gift settlement deeds as not binding on him and to declare them as null and void which is hopelessly barred by limitation. By virtue of registered gift settlement deeds executed by defendant No.1 in favour of the petitioner-respondent No.4, he is collecting the rents from the tenants as a lawful owner and respondent No.1-petitioner-plaintiff is not entitled for any share. Respondent No.1-petitioner-plaintiff is not entitled to seek amendment for cancellation of gift settlement deed after lapse of time and the application is barred by limitation, prayed to dismiss the same.

6.1. The learned trial Court allowed IA.No.792 of 2015 on 12.07.2017.

6.2. Petitioner has filed CRP against the order dated 12.07.2017 vide CRP No.4019 of 2017 which was allowed by the High Court on 23.02.2018 and remanded the