THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2823 OF 2025

ORDER

This civil revision petition has been filed aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Agent to Government at Bhadradri Kothagudem (‘trial Court’ for brevity) in I.A.No.312 of 2024 in O.S.No.206 of 2023, dated 28.05.2025 wherein the application filed by respondent Nos.2 to 4 seeking amendment of the boundaries of suit schedule properties is allowed.

2. Heard Sri Yabbez, learned counsel, representing Sri P.Rama Sharana Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Smt. Shiva Parvati, learned counsel representing Smt. P. Radhika, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to as per their nomenclature in the trial Court.

4. Learned counsel for the defendants/petitioners submits that the plaintiffs/respondents filed a simple suit for perpetual injunction vide O.S.No.206 of 2023 on the file of the Agent to Government, Bhadradri Kothagudem restraining the defendants from interfering with suit schedule property. Subsequently, the plaintiffs/respondents filed I.A.No.312 of 2024 seeking amendment of the plaint and the said application was allowed on 28.05.2025. He further submits that by virtue of the said amendment entire character of the suit is going to be changed and the plaintiffs without mentioning the correct boundaries to the suit schedule property filed suit and they are not entitled to seek amendment of the boundaries to the suit schedule property and the same is not permissible under law. Hence, the impugned order passed by the trial Court is liable to be set aside.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for plaintiffs/respondents submits that plaintiffs are not withdrawing any pleadings in the suit nor introducing any new case and the character of the suit is not going to change. The plaintiffs filed application seeking amendment of boundaries to the suit schedule property and also to divide the schedule property into different categories and by virtue of the amendment no prejudice is going to be caused to petitioners/defendants and trial Court has rightly allowed the application and there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned order passed by the learned Agent to Government and the revision filed by the petitioner is liable to be dismissed.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made by respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the plaintiffs filed suit in O.S.No.206 of 2023 on the file of trial Court for grant of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the suit schedule property. Along with the said suit the plaintiff filed application for grant of temporary injunction invoking the provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure. It is not in dispute that during the pendency of the suit the sole plaintiff died and plaintiff Nos.2 to 4 were impleaded as legal heirs of the sole plaintiff. The plaintiffs filed I.A.No.312 of 2024 seeking amendment of boundaries of suit schedule property. After perusal of the plaint and I.A.No.312 of 2024, it reveals that initially the plaintiff mentioned the suit schedule properties in item 1 and 2 only. By way of amendment the plaintiff divided the item No.1 of schedule property into A, B, C and D and item No.2 of schedule property into A, B, C, D and E categories and mentioned specific boundaries to each one of the item. Even according to the parties, the plaintiffs have not included any extent of land more than the land which was pleaded in the original suit nor are seeking amendment of the Survey numbers. The only amendment which was sought by the plaintiffs is to divide item Nos.1 and 2 of the schedule property into separate categories.

7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view that plaintiffs are not introducing any new case nor withdrawing any admis