KALAL SUGUNA Vs. A.P. HOUSE BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs, challenging the order, dated 11.09.2014, passed in I.A.No.144 of 2014 in O.S.No.78 of 2005, by the Junior Civil Judge, Adilabad, whereby, the petition filed by the revision petitioners/plaintiffs under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC requesting to permit them to carry out amendment in paragraph 3 of the plaint and also in the prayer column by substituting 'Survey No.70/20 old corresponding to Survey No.70/20/2' with 'Survey No.72/20 old corresponding to new Survey No.72/20/2', was dismissed.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioners/plaintiffs and perused the record. The respondents are served with notice and they entered appearance. Despite listing this matter under the caption "For Orders", there is no representation on their behalf.

(3.) The learned counsel for the revision petitioners/plaintiffs would contend that by oversight, a wrong survey number, i.e., 'Survey No.70/20 old corresponding to Survey No.70/20/2' was mentioned in the plaint. The said mistake is purely a typographical mistake. The correct survey number is 'Survey No.72/20 old corresponding to new Survey No.72/20/2'. The correct survey number is required to be brought on record for just adjudication of the subject matter of the suit, which is filed for perpetual injunction against the respondents/ defendants. The amendment sought would not alter the nature of the suit. Further, the same is not hit by the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963. The amendment sought is necessary for adjudication of the real questions in controversy between the parties to the litigation and ultimately prayed to set aside the order under challenge and allow the subject interlocutory application as prayed for.