THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.582 of 2010 ORDER: This civil revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the plaintiffs in O.S.No.364 of 2001 on the file of the II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal, aggrieved by the order dated 09.10.2009 passed in I.A.No.382 of 2009. O.S.No.364 of 2001 is filed for the relief of declaration and eviction from the suit schedule property admeasuring 500 square yards covered by Survey No.578. In the plaint, suit schedule is described with a boundary of eastern side as the land covered by Survey No.577. It is not in dispute that the respondent is contesting the proceedings, by denying the title and correctness of the boundaries. When the matter was coming up for arguments, the petitioners have filed I.A.No.382 of 2009 for amendment of the boundary on eastern side. The Court below by the impugned order dismissed the application. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that mere allowing the application filed by the petitioners for amendment of the plaint does not alter the nature of the suit and no further evidence is also necessary. The learned counsel has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of A.P. and others vs. M/s.Pioneer Builders, A.P.[1] At the out set, it is to be noticed that no valid explanation is offered by the petitioners to entertain this application for amendment at this stage, to get over the proviso to Order VI Rule 17 of C.P.C. Having regard to the nature of dispute and the defence of the respondent, if the amendment is permitted at this stage, it certainly causes prejudice to the case of the respondent. Even in the judgment relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioners in the case of M/s.Pioneer Builders, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that liberal approach should be adopted with regard to petitions filed under Order VI Rule 17 of C.P.C., unless serious injustice or irreparable loss is likely to be caused to the other side. In the instant case, if the amendment is permitted, it will certainly cause grave injustice to the respondent. For the foregoing reasons and in view of the findings recorded by the Court below, I do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the Court below and the civil revision petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _______ 15.04.2010 JSU/MRR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.582 of 2010 Date: 15.04.2010 JSU [1] AIR 2007 SUPREME COURT 113(1)