SANAPALA RAMANUJULU @ RAMANUJA CHARUYLU Vs. SANAPALA SRIDHRUDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is filed challenging the order dated 26.7.2010 in IA No. 182 of 2010 in OS No. 898 of 2003 of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam. The petitioner is the plaintiff in the above suit. He filed the suit for perpetual injunction restraining the respondents-defendants from interfering with his possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property. The respondents filed the written statements refuting the allegations made by the petitioner. Trial commenced and concluded. The matter is coming up for arguments.

(2.) At this stage, the petitioner filed IA No. 182 of 2010 under Order VI Rule 17 CPC contending that during the pendency of the suit, taking advantage of the petitioner's absence at a time that he was sick and hospitalized and his family members were there in a hospital attending on him, the respondents made construction of a house in a part of the plaint schedule property forcibly and he be permitted to amend the plaint by seeking an additional relief of mandatory injunction apart from making other amendments in the body of the plaint.

(3.) Counter-affidavit was filed by 2nd respondent denying the allegations made by the petitioner, contending that this application is filed only to drag on the matter and alleging that the story stated by the petitioner in the affidavit filed accompanying this I.A., is false. It is also pleaded that the amendment sought is barred by limitation and that the petitioner should have also sought the relief of declaration of title.