THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.234 OF 2023

ORDER :

This revision petition is filed by the revision petitioner aggrieved by the order dated 27.11.2018 passed in I.A.No.291 of 2018 in O.S.No.1082 of 2015 by the I-Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar.

2. I.A.No.291 of 2018 is filed by the revision petitioner who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.1082 of 2015, under Order VI Rule 17 r/w.Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) and Rule 28 of Civil Rules of Practice to permit the petitioner to amend the reliefs as follows :

“ Proposed amendment-I :

After para 9 add Para No.9A It is submitted that the defendants upon receipt of summons appeared and filed counter and written statement. That these defendants by way of counter raised serious questions of title basing on forged and fabricated document. As such, the Hon’ble Court constrained to dismiss the interim application u/O.39 R.1 & 2 r/w.S.151 CPC filed in the above suit as the present is suit is for Injunction Simplicitor. Thereupon, the Defendants illegally trespassed into Suit Schedule Property and occupied the same. In proof of the illegal occupation of the defendants, Plaintiff filed documents. As there is a denial of title and illegal occupation of the Suit Schedule Property, it is essential to pass a decree for recovery of possession and Declaration of title in respect of the suit property.

Proposed amendment-II :

After Para IV add para IVA :

The cause of action for filing the above suit firstly arose on 25.07.2015 and 14.08.2015 and subsequently arose in view of serious denial of Plaintiff’s title over the Suit Schedule Property by the defendants basing on forged and fabricated document by filing written statement and finally for making illegal occupation of Suit Schedule Property subsequent to dismissal of the interim application u/O.39 R.1 & 2 r/w.S.151 CPC filing in the above suit.

Proposed amendment-III :

After para VI add para VIA :

The total market value of Suit Schedule Property is Rs.7,80,000/- as per the market value certificate. The 3/4^th value of the Plaintiffs for the relief of declaration and relief of recovery of possession and made under Sec.24 (c) of APCF and SV Act comes to Rs.5,58,500/-. On such valuation, the plaintiff pays am advolerm court fee of Rs.8026/- which is sufficient.

Proposed amendment-IV :

Prayer :

In the prayer and relief portion the two reliefs should be added :

e) To declare the plaintiff as absolute owner of the Suit Schedule property.

f) To direct the defendants to restore possession of the Suit Schedule property in favour of the Plaintiff.”

3. The Court below observed that there is serious dispute on title of petitioner over the suit schedule property and the rival claims of both parties were decided in I.A.No.593 of 2015 by dismissing the claim of petitioner by order dated 08.02.20215. As the amendment will change the nature of suit, the Court below dismissed the said petition.

4. Heard Sri Kiran Palakurthi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri D. Ramana Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents.

5. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that after filing the suit for perpetual injunction, vide O.S.No.1082 of 2015, the plaintiff was dispossessed from the suit property by the defendants, as the Court declined to grant temporary injunction. As such, revision petitioner filed petition for amendment. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner further contends that as the plaintiff was dispossessed from the suit property, during the course of trial, she filed petition for amendment. In support of his contention, he relied on the judgment in T.V.Ramakrishna Reddy Vs M. Mallappa & another1, wherein it is reiterated that suit for permanent injunction simplicitor shall not be maintainable if the title of the suit property is in dispute or under a cloud. In Anathula

1 (2021) LL SC 423

Sudhakar Vs P.Buchi Reddy (dead) by L.Rs, and others, [(2008) 4 SCC 59] it is observed that when the