IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3754 of 2009 Between: Siruvuri Appalanarasimha Raju and 5 others ..... PETITIONERS AND M/s.G.V.K.Constructions, Visakhapatnam and 21 others .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3754 of 2009 ORDER: Heard both the counsel. Petitioners herein are the plaintiffs who filed the suit O.S.51/2006 on the file of the IV Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam against the respondents herein for declaration that they are entitled to 1/3rd share of the constructed area from out of the multi-storied building, being promoted by the defendants in the suit schedule site proportionately in all the floors including the common areas and for possession of the same, completing the construction in full. It is the case of the petitioners that the 1st respondent-promoter has not allotted the 1/3rd share in each and every floor in favour of the plaintiffs and the 1st respondent has not only sold the undivided unspecified share in excess of 2/3rd share and executed several documents in favour of the proposed defendants 2 to 22 alienating the constructing area even before allotting the 1/3rd constructed area in favour of the plaintiffs. Therefore, they wanted to implead the purchasers i.e. Respondents Nos.2 to 22 and to amend the pleadings in the plaint and accordingly filed I.A.594/2009 under Or.1 Rule-10 of CPC r/w.Rule-28 of the Civil Rules of Practice. The Court below without inviting the counter from the 1st respondent/defendant, dismissed the said application contrary to the pleadings of the petitioners/plaintiffs. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision petition is filed. I am of the opinion that the impugned order is in clear violation of the pleadings narrated in the affidavit filed in support of the application seeking to implead all the proposed respondents Nos.2 to 22. Therefore, I am inclined to set aside the impugned order and the same is accordingly set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Court below directing to consider and dispose of the matter afresh after filing the counter by the 1st respondent/defendant and after giving opportunity of being heard to both parties, and considering the relevant documents relied on by both the parties, in accordance with law. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 23.12.2010 Dsr