##PAGE1##

2026:APHC:3367

APHC010287672025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

SATURDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.1416, 1547 & 1548 of 2025

Between:

K. Aravinda Rani, W/o K. Srinivasa Murthy, Aged about 80 years, Occ:

Housewife, R/o D.No.1/66/2, Vaishnavi Nagar, Tiruchanoor, Tirupati

Rural Mandal, Tirupati District (Erstwhile Chittoor District)

...Petitioner

AND

1. Penaguluru Lakshmi Devi, W/o P. Suresh Babu, Aged about 32 years,

R/o D.No.9/187-13, Vontela Nagar, Railway Kodur Town and Mandal,

Annamayya District (Erstwhile Kadapa District)

2. The Sub Registrar, Renigunta Sub Registrar Office, Renigunta, Tirupati

District (Erstwhile Chittoor District)

...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner : Ms.M.L.Neelima

Counsel for Respondent No.1: M/s.CKR Associates

The Court made the following COMMON ORDER:

The plaintiff in O.S. No.288 of 2018 on the file of the Court of X

Additional District Judge, Tirupathi, aggrieved by the separate orders

dated 25.2.2025 passed in I.A. Nos.33, 35 and 21 of 2024, filed the

present Civil Revision Petition Nos.1416, 1547 and 1548 of 2025

respectively, and the same are being disposed of by this common order.

2. The respondent No.1 herein is the defendant No.1 in the said suit

filed I.A. No.33 of 2024 under Order VIII Rule 6A of the Code of Civil

Procedure, 1908 (CPC) seeking to file counter-claim in the suit on the

2 2026:APHC:3367

premise that she is having right over the suit schedule property. I.A.

No.35 of 2024 was filed under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of

CPC seeking permission to amend the written statement by adding

counter claim pleadings. In view of the application made seeking

permission to file counter claim, she filed I.A. No.21 of 2024 under Order

XIV Rule 5 of CPC to frame additional issue to the effect that she is

entitled to the reliefs as prayed for in the counter claim. The learned X

Additional District Judge, Tirupathi, vide separate orders allowed the said

applications and the present revision petitions are filed against the orders

passed in the respective I.As.

3. Heard Ms.M.Neelima, learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff.

Also heard Mr.Shaik Md. Umar Abdullah, learned counsel for the

respondent No.1/defendant No.1.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner while referring to the

chronological events filed along with the Memo dated 23.1.2026, made

submissions to the effect that the above referred suit was instituted on

05.11.2018 seeking a decree for cancellation of the registered sale deed

dated 31.10.2015 and for permanent injunction against the respondent

No.1/defendant No.1, her husband, their henchmen, agents etc., from

interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner/

plaintiff in respect of the suit schedule property. She submits that the

respondent No.1/defendant No.1 filed her written statement on 28.1.2019

and the issues were framed on 17.3.2020, that initially the petitioner filed

I.A. No.18 of 2024 seeking amendment of the plaint, however the same

was dismissed as not pressed. On the same day, learned counsel

submits that the respondent No.1/defendant No.1 filed the above

mentioned I.As., i.e., I.A. No.33 of 2024 raising a counter claim and the

other two consequential applications. She submits that the petitioner

resisted the said applications by filing counters, but the learned Trial

Court vide the orders under revision erroneously allowed the I.As.,

without considering the matter in the proper perspective. She submits

that apart from the oral arguments, the petitioner filed written arguments

before the Trial Court and contended that application for counter claim

cannot be allowed after framing of the issues, more particularly in view of

the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ashok Kumar

Kalra vs. Wing CDR. Surendra Agnihotri, (2020) 2 SCC 394 . She submits that

overlooking the said judgment, the learned Trial Court went wrong in

allowi