PATNAM RAMESH Vs. MOTHUKURU LAKSHMI KANTHAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, by the unsuccessful respondent/defendant, is directed against the orders dtd. 31/1/2019, of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur, YSR Kadapa District, passed in IA.No.1941 of 2018 in OS.No.46 of 2008 filed under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('the Code', for brevity) requesting to permit her to amend the plaint schedule survey number as S.No.306/2 instead of S.No.396/2 and consequential correction in the survey number in the records.

(2.) Heard Mr. Sodum Anvesha, learned counsel for the revision petitioner/defendant and Mr. V. Nithesh, learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to as the plaintiff and defendant.

(3.) The case of the petitioner/plaintiff, as stated in the affidavit filed in support of the request for amendment, in brief, is that in a suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale, dtd. 4/2/2004, at the stage of arguments, it was noticed that there was a typographical mistake in the suit schedule survey number by mentioning as 'S.No.396/2', instead of 'S.No.306/2.' as tick mark ' ' which is a part of the letter 'Pa' in vernacular language touched '0' in the survey number '306' making it appear as '396'. The defendant did not raise any objection to the survey number in his reply notice or in the written statement. Further, the proposed amendment does not change the suit schedule property or nature of the suit and no prejudice will be caused to the case of the defendant by allowing the proposed amendment, rather it is just to decide the suit claims.