AKATI BALRAJAVVA Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against an Order dated 8-3-2006 made in I.A.No.2 of 2006 in O.S.No.45 of 1999 on the file of the learned Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kamareddy.

(2.) Petitioner is the plaintiff. Respondents are defendants. Petitioner laid the above suit for declaration of title over the suit schedule property and for permanent injunction. In spite of granting several opportunities, respondents have not filed their written statement. Therefore, their right to file written statement was forfeited by the Court below in the year 1997. However, thereafter, the 3rd respondent-defendant participated in the suit proceedings and cross-examined the witnesses of the petitioner-plaintiff.

(3.) Later, the present I.A.No.2 of 2006 is filed by the petitioner-plaintiff praying the Court to close the evidence of defendants, since their right to file the written statement was forfeited. Respondent No.3 herein filed a counter stating that the defendants were set ex parte in the suit and thereafter the Court below dismissed the suit; upon which, the petitioner-plaintiff preferred an appeal before the learned District Judge, Nizamabad. The appellate Court remanded the matter to the trial Court for fresh disposal after adducing further evidence. Thereafter, the matter was taken up by the trial Court and after closing the plaintiff's side evidence, the matter was adjourned for defendants' side evidence. Further, even after non-filing of the written statement, the right of adducing evidence on behalf or the 3rd defendant is not forfeited and he is having every right to lead evidence on his behalf. The plaint in has no right to deny his natural right. After hearing both the parties, the Court below, however, dismissed the petition. Aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed.