THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1613 of 2025

ORDER:

The Civil Revision Petition is filed with the following

prayer:

“… pleased to set aside the order I.A.No.210/2022 in

O.S.No.33/2022, Dt.24/02/2025 on the file of above Principal District and Sessions Judge at Jangaon by allow the petition filed by the Petitioner/Defendant and to pass…”

2. Heard Mr. M.Saleem, learned counsel for revision petitioner and Mr. Srinivasa Rao Madiraju, learned counsel for

respondent Nos.1 to 3.

3. Learned counsel for revision petitioner submits that under Order VI Rule 17 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’) a petition cannot be filed for amendment of schedule of the suit. It is submitted that by permitting the amendment, the trial Court ignored the provisions of CPC. It is further submitted that nature of the suit and subject property cannot be changed by permitting the amendment of schedule. It is also submitted that suit is of the year 2020 and is filed for

specific performance of agreement of sale dated 20.12.2018. That the trial Court fell in error in allowing the application bearing I.A.No.210 of 2022 in O.S.No.33 of 2022 under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC on the file of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Jangaon, by docket order dated 24.02.2025.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents/plaintiffs submitted that the respondents are the plaintiffs in the suit. They filed Order VI Rule 17 petition to delete the words “plaintiff and in western and northern boundaries of petition schedule”. Learned counsel has invited the attention of this Court to the affidavit filed on behalf of petitioners in I.A.No.210 of 2022 in I.A.No.347 of 2020 in O.S.No.33 of 2022. It is further submitted that the trial Court has considered the I.A. on the ground that I.A. seeking the amendment was made before commencement of trial and amendments can be tested during the time of trial and permitted to amend the plaint and the schedule under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC. It is also submitted that trial Court has not committed any error in passing the order dated 24.02.2025.

5. Heard learned counsels, perused the record and considered the submissions.

6. Suit bearing O.S.No.33 of 2022 came to be filed in the Court of Principal/Additional District Judge, Warangal, for the specific performance of agreement of sale dated 20.12.2018. I.A.No.210 of 2022 came to be filed in the Court of Principal District Judge at Jangaon. The contents of the affidavit filed in I.A.No.210 of 2022 are as follows:

“I submit that we the petitioners have filed the above suit for the relief of specific performance of agreement of sale dated 20-12-2018 against the respondent/defendant. We have also filed an application for grant of temporary injunction to restrain the respondent from alienating, mortgaging or otherwise encumbering the suit schedule property to third parties pending disposal of the suit. The respondent/defendant filed his counter and written statement while admitting the execution of sale agreement dated 20-12-2018. We came to know that in the plaint schedule as well as petition schedule the west and north side suit land was mistakenly typed as "land of plaintiff and". In fact, we are not having owning any land on west and northern side of the suit schedule property. The said mistake is purely inadvertent. We have filed an application for amendment of plaint schedule which is pending. But subsequently after transfer of the suit to this Honourable Court, we have advised to submit that the injunction proceedings are supplementary proceedings, the mistake in petition schedule also to be corrected by way of amendment.”

7. The prayer sought for in I.A.No.210 of 2022 is as follows:

“Hence it is prayed, that the Honourable Court may be pleased to allow us to delete the words "plaintiff and" in western and northern boundaries of petition schedule" for which acts of kindness, we shall ever pray.”

8. Upon hearing the counsels, the Principal District a