THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.4481 OF 2011 ORDER: The petitioners are the plaintiffs. They filed suit for partition. In the said suit being O.S.No.39 of 2008, the respondents/defendants filed written statements. Subsequently, they filed I.A.No.140 of 2011 seeking permission to file an additional written statement, wherein they raised a plea of non- joinder of necessary parties. The same was allowed. Thereafter, the suit went into trial. The plaintiffs completed their evidence. The evidence of defendants is also adduced to some extent. At that stage, the petitioners filed I.A.No.461 of 2011 seeking permission to file rejoinder. The same was dismissed by the impugned order, aggrieved by which, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed. This Court heard the counsel for the petitioners/plaintiffs. As rightly observed by the trial Court and as noticed by this Court, the rejoinder is not only with reference to the plea of the defendants in the additional written statement though the suit is bad for non-joinder, the lengthy rejoinder was sought to be filed touching upon various allegations and averments taken by the defendants in the written statement. Therefore, if the rejoinder is allowed now, it would certainly cause prejudice to the defendants and the trial Court was correct in rejecting the application. Further, the error, if any, is not one such, which cannot be corrected at the appellate stage. It is always open to the petitioners to take advantage of Section 105 (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and set forth the error as a ground of objection in the appeal that may be instituted after the disposal of the suit. The Civil Revision Petition is misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 4th November 2011 RRB