THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY C.R.P.No.3496 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner filed O.S.No.800 of 2002 in the Court of III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kadapa, against the respondents, for the relief of declaration of title and perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. The suit was dismissed after contest. Thereupon, the petitioner filed A.S.No.24 of 2005 in the Court of Family Judge, Kadapa, and the same is pending. In that appeal, she filed I.A.No.161 of 2009 under Rule 17 of Order VI CPC, with a prayer to permit her to amend the plaint. Her effort was to incorporate the relief of recovery of possession instead of the one for perpetual injunction. The application was opposed by the respondents. Through order, dated 10.07.2009, the lower appellate Court dismissed the I.A. Hence the civil revision petition. Heard Sri C.Dharma Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner. It is, no doubt, true that an application for amendment can be filed at any stage of the proceedings, provided necessary ingredients prescribed by law are established. By addition of proviso to Rule 17 of Order VI CPC, the Parliament restricted the scope of amendment. However, there does not exist total bar for amendment, even at the stage of appeal, if a proper case is made out. The suit filed by the petitioner was the one for declaration of title and for perpetual injunction. The nature of defence that may be offered by the respondents, would be confined to the one for ascertaining the title and possession over the property. If, on the other hand, the suit is for the relief of recovery of possession, further questions as to the entitlement of the plaintiff to recover possession and the plea of adverse possession that may be taken by the respondents, need to be examined. Even assuming that the petitioner made out a case for amendment of the pleadings, it needs to be noted that an amendment of this nature cannot be permitted at the stage of appeal. It is only before a trial Court that such an exercise can be undertaken. In the event of the amendment being allowed, the issues have to be recast and fresh evidence has to be adduced. Such a possibility does not exist at the stage of appeal. The lower appellate Court has taken a correct view of the matter and this Court is not inclined to interfere with the revision. The civil revision petition is, accordingly, dismissed. It is, however, left open to the petitioner to institute a fresh suit if the relief claimed therein, is not barred by any provisions of law. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J Date: 10.08.2009 sjp