IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No : 3130 OF 2007 Between: Chevvakula Madhava Rao . .Petitioner And Muthangi Pardhasaradhi and others. .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No : 3130 of 2007 ORDER : This revision petition is filed by the plaintiff under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the dismissal order dated 11.06.2007 passed by I Additional District Judge, East Godavari in I.A. No.820 of 2006 in O.S.No.24 of 2002 which was filed under Order VI Rule 17 r/w Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure for amendment of the plaint. Petitioner-plaintiff instituted the above suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 27.07.1998 in respect of the suit schedule property stating that under the suit agreement, the defendant agreed to sell the suit schedule property at the rate of Rs.5,25,000/- per acre and the plaintiff paid an advance of Rs.1,50,000/- on the date of agreement of sale and the balance amount was agreed to be paid on or before 31.12.1998 and that the land of an extent of Ac.4-00 is covered by the agreement of sale. Later the petitioner filed the impugned I.A stating that on the next date of the said agreement i.e., on 28.07.1998 a sum of Rs.5,000/- was paid towards the balance sale consideration to the third respondent as instructed by the 1st respondent and obtained a receipt from the 3rd respondent. According to him, the said receipt was misplaced and at the time of drafting the legal notice, when the said fact was brought to the notice of his advocate, he was informed that unless the same is covered by any receipt/document, it is not proper either to refer the same in the notice or in the plaint. Recently, he could locate the said receipt and hence, he sought to amend the plaint by incorporating payment of Rs.5,000/- on 28.07.1998 to the 3rd respondent at the instance of 1st respondent. On dismissal of the said I.A, the present revision is filed. The lower Court rightly observed that It is not disputed that either in the lawyer’s notice or in the plaint, the payment of Rs.5,000/- to the 3rd respondent on 28.07.1998 at the instance of the 1st respondent was not mentioned. It was observed that the plaintiff during his examination as P.W.1 has not whispered about the payment of Rs.5,000/- to the 3rd respondent and the alleged explanation that though he was instructed to his Advocate, he failed to refer the same in the lawyer’s notice and in the plaint. His brothers who were examined also not deposed on this aspect and about passing of the receipt by 3rd respondent. When D.W-1 was examined on behalf of the defendants no suggestion was put to him about the alleged payment of Rs.5,000/- to 3rd respondent on the instructions of the 1st respondent, but only at the fag end of the matter and when the case is reached the stage of arguments, the above application is filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that since there is an averment by the defendants that for the balance extent of Ac.2-00 of land no advance was paid and as this amount of Rs.5,000/- was paid towards advance for balance land of Ac.2-00, if the petitioner is not permitted to amend the plaint as prayed for, he would be deprived of an opportunity to prove the same. I see no merit in the said contention since there is no such averment in the plaint or in the evidence of plaintiff as P.W.1 that a sum of Rs.5,000/- was paid towards advance for the balance of Ac.2-00 of land, and therefore, the plaintiff cannot introduce a new case than the one pleaded in the plaint that too at the stage of arguments. In view of the same, the impugned order passed by the lower Court dismissing the I.A. does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality warranting interference by this Court. The Civil Revision Petition fails and the same is dismissed accordingly. No costs. ______________________ JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY December 04, 2009 KSH