LAWS(APH)-2006-12-134

VARANASI VITAL RAO Vs. JALLEPALLI JANARDHANARAO & ANR

Decided On December 13, 2006
VARANASI VITAL RAO Appellant
V/S
Jallepalli Janardhanarao And Anr Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by an Order dated 23-12-2004 made in IAGR No.3530 of 2004 in cross-objections in A.S.No.81 of 2004on the file of the learned I Additional District Judge, Srikakulam.

(2.) The petitioner is the 1st respondent in the above appeal and plaintiff in O.S.No. 126 of 2004 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Amudalavalasa. Respondent No.1 herein is the appellant in the above appeal and 2nd defendant in the suit. Respondent No. 2 is the 2nd respondent in the appeal and 1st defendant in the suit. The parties are hereinafter referred to as they were arrayed in the suit.

(3.) The plaintiff (petitioner herein) laid a suit for recovery of certain amount on the foot of a promissory note. The suit was decreed as against the 2nd defendant and was dismissed as against the 1st defendant, father of the 2nd defendant, on the ground that his signature was forged. Defendant No.2 carried the matter in appeal being A.S.No. 81 of 2004 on the file of the learned I Additional District Judge, Srikakulam being aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree made in O.S.No. 126 of 2004 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Amudalavalasa. Defendant No.1 against whom the suit was dismissed was also made a proforma party i.e. respondent No.2, in the appeal. After receipt of notice in the appeal, the plaintiff filled cross-objections to the extent of denial of his claim for costs while decreeing the suit. However, thereafter he filed the present IAGR No. 3530 of 2004 purported to be under Order VI Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code seeking amendment of cross-objections already filed. In this petition, altogether a different ground has been raised, i.e. to allow the cross-objections by setting aside the dismissal of the suit as against the 1st defendant, who is the 2nd respondent in the appeal. Here, it may be necessary to notice that the plaintiff has not filed any independent appeal insofar as dismissing the suit against the 1st defendant is concerned.