HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. No.6131 of 2009 Dated 30-11-2010 Between: Gorle Nooka Raju. …Petitioner. And: Gudala Simhachalam. …Respondent. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. No.6131 of 2009 ORDER: Revision petitioner is defendant in O.S.No.266 of 2006 on the file of the 2nd Additional Junior Civil Judge, Anakapalli. The suit for recovery of amount was instituted by the respondent in which the petitioner had filed written statement earlier, but later wanted to amend the same by adding para 9A and 9B after paragraph 9 of the original written statement. The proposed amendments were disallowed by the trial court on the ground that it is a belated application and moved after plaintiff’s evidence was over and if such amendment is allowed, prejudice will be caused to the plaintiff. Heard both the learned counsel. Proposed amendment is as follows: “9A. The defendant an agriculturist and poultry farming, this defendant never done any business at any point of time, the plaintiff filed I.A.1016/2006 to attach the defendant agriculture land, the defendant is entitled for the benefit of Act 4 of 1938, and Act 7 of 1977 and Act 45 of 87 and other agricultural Debt Relief Acts.” “9B. This defendant humbly submits that when the defendant received notice from the plaintiff, and defendant demanded the Vegi Apparao, in the presence of Gompa Demudu to return the Blank promissory note, but Vegi Apparao promised to defendant, to return the pronote when it is traced in the of vegi Apparao, the defendant made enquiry about the plaintiff and came to know that the plaintiff is the name lender and person by name Vegi Apparao was main instrumental in filing the suit against the defendant in the name of P.W.1.” It is well settled that the defendant/petitioner can take inconsistent pleas in the written statement. The plea now sought to be raised is to claim benefit under Act 4 of 1938, Act 7 of 1977 and Act 45 of 1987. I am unable to accept the reasoning of the court below that the amendment cannot be allowed even though the defendant’s evidence is yet to commence. So far as the plaintiff is concerned, he will have a right to file a rejoinder to the amended part of the written statement and he will also be entitled to adduce further evidence if any to the extent of the said amendment. No prejudice accordingly would be caused to the respondent/plaintiff to the extent of the claim of the application being belated. Accordingly, the C.R.P. is allowed and application for amendment of written statement as prayed for in I.A.No.222 of 2009 shall stand allowed on condition of the petitioner depositing costs of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two thousand five hundred only) payable to the respondent within two weeks from today, before the court below. On compliance of such condition, the petitioner shall be permitted to file amended written statement and thereafter, the trial court shall proceed further in the matter and dispose of the suit preferably before the 31-3-2011. Office to communicate the copy of order to the trial Court within one week along with the records if any. __________________________________ JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR Dated 30-11-2010 Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. No.6131 of 2009 Dated 30-11-2010