BARISETTY VIJAYALAXMI Vs. S.SADA VEERAMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order dtd. 28/2/2013 in I.A.No.711 of 2012 in O.S.No.241 of 2011 on the file of learned II Junior Civil Judge Court, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, the petitioner/ plaintiff has filed the present Civil Revision Petition.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will be referred as per their array before the learned II Junior Civil Judge Court, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

(3.) The brief facts of the case as can be seen from the record available before this Court are that the petitioner/plaintiff has filed O.S.No.241 of 2011 against the respondent Nos.1 to 3/defendant Nos.1 to 3 for perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property i.e., house bearing No.8/2/339/A/4. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner/plaintiff filed I.A.No.711 of 2012 under Order VI Rule 17 read with Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking amendment of the boundary pertaining to the suit schedule property, wherein it was alleged that due to oversight the petitioner/plaintiff has mentioned the northern boundary of the suit schedule property as 'house belongs to plaintiff' but in fact, the actual boundaries on the northern boundary of the suit schedule property is 'house belongs to Smt. N. Sailaja, H.No.8/2/339/A/4, BJR Nagar, Film Nagar, Hyderabad'. In support of this contention, third party affidavit is also filed. Therefore, the petitioner/ plaintiff filed the petition seeking amendment of the northern boundary pertaining to the suit schedule property