ANAGONDI CHENNAIAH Vs. ANAGONDI CHANDRASEKHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the plaintiff. Aggrieved by the orders dtd. 5/11/2018 in I.A.No.1050/2018 in O.S.No.501/2011 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kadapa, the petitioner filed the Revision Petition.

(2.) The petitioner filed the suit for partition. In the said suit, the defendants 3 and 4 filed I.A.No.1050/2018 under Order VI Rule 17 r/w sec.151 CPC for the following prayer:

(3.) After elaborate discussion, the Court below has allowed the application. Assailing the said orders, the present revision is filed. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has mainly contended that the order of the Court below is contrary to proviso of Order VI Rule 17 CPC. Admittedly, issues were framed basing on the pleadings and the plaintiff adduced evidence and filed his chief examination affidavit and marked Ex.A1 to A5 on behalf of the plaintiff. Matter is posted for cross-examination of PW1. In view of the bar imposed in the provision, once the trial has commenced no application or amendment shall be allowed. The said objection was taken by the parties in the Court below. But without considering the same, the I.A. filed by the defendants/respondents was allowed. Hence the same is contrary to the proviso of Order VI Rule 17 CPC.