ORDER:

Transposition of some of the respondents in the counter claim who are the plaintiffs in the main suit for partition, on the death of the sole counter claimant/1st defendant has come up for consideration in this revision petition.

2. This revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 22.04.2022 in I.A.No.521 of 2021 in (counter claim) O.S.No.323 of 2011 on the file of the Court of II Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam filed under Order 23 Rule 1A, Order 1 Rule 10, Order 22, Rule 3 and Order 6 Rule 17 r/w Section 151 CPC and Rule 28 of Civil Rules of Practice to permit respondents no.1 to 4 in the claim petition i.e. the petitioners no.2 to 5 herein to amend the claim petition being the legal heirs of their father the original claim petitioner/D-1 in suit for transposing them as claimants 2 to 5 as their father died on 03.04.2021 pending the adjudication of the suit and the counter claim and further to permit the petitioners to carry out the consequential following amendments:

“(A) The word ‘died’ is to be mentioned after the name of claimant in short cause title, long cause title.

(B) The claimant has to be shown as claimant number “1)” and we the plaintiffs 1 to 4 have to be shown as claimants 2 to 5 in short cause title and long cause title.

(C) In claim petition paragraph III and in cause of action paragraph it is to be amended that “The “1st claimant” in the place of claimant wherever it occurs.

“Claimants 2 to 5” in the place of respondents 1 to 4 “Respondents 1 to 6 in the place of respondents 5 to

10.

“the claimants 2, 4 & 5 “ in the place of respondents 1, 3 & 4.

“Claimants 2 to 5 and 1st respondent” in the place of respondents 1 to 5.

“Respondents 2 & 3” in the place of respondents 6 & 7 “Respondents 4 to 6” in the place of respondents 8 to

10 “1st respondent” in the place of 5th respondent “Respondents 2 to 6” in the place of respondents 6 to

10 “Respondents 4 & 5” in the place of respondents 8 & 9 (d) In the prayer paragraph in the place of claimant it is to be stated “claimants” and in the place of my it is to be stated as “our” and in the prayer (a) in the place of claimant it is to be stated as 1st claimant and in the place of 5th respondent it is to be stated as “1st respondent” and in prayer (b) in the place of claimant it is to be stated as 1st claimant and in the place of 5th respondent it is to be stated as “1st respondent” and in the place of respondents 6 & 7 it is to be stated as “respondents 2 & 3” and in the prayer (c) in the place of 6 & 7 respondents it is to be stated as respondents 2 and 3 and in the place of respondents 8 to 10 it is to be stated as “4 to 6” and in prayer (e) and (f) in the place of respondents 6 to 10 it is to be substituted as “2 to 6” as otherwise they will be put to serious loss and hardship.”

3. The 1st petitioner is the 1st defendant in the suit filed for partition by the petitioners 2 to 5. They are the plaintiffs no.1 to 4. The respondents no.1 to 3 herein are D-2 to D-4. The respondents no.4 to 6 are D-5 to D-7.

4. In the original suit in O.S.No.323 of 2011 filed for partition, D-1 filed a counter claim seeking the following reliefs:

a) for cancellation of the gift settlement deed dated

26.08.2006 executed by the claimant in favour of the 5th respondent.

b) For cancellation of GPA cum sale agreement dated

15.12.2006 executed by the claimant and the 5th respondent in favour of the respondents 6 & 7 c) For consequential relief of cancellation of subsequent documents executed by the respondents 6 & 7 in favour of the respondents 8 to 10 in respect of the plaint schedule properties;

d) For consequential relief of recovery of possession of the plaint schedule properties.

e) For mandatory injunction directing the respondents 6 to

10 to remove the unauthorized constructions including the boundary wall around the item Nos.2 and 3 of the plaint schedule properties and if the respondents 6 to 10 failed to do so, the Hon’ble Court may be