IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.5249 OF 2009 Between : Dumpa Mallaiah and another .... PETITIONERS A N D Pendem Kanakamma and another. …RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.5249 OF 2009 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order, dated 13.10.2009, in I.A.No.216 of 2009 in M.V.O.P.No.272 of 2008, on the file of Judge, Family Court- cum-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Karimnagar, whereunder and whereby, the application filed for amendment of the counter in the main M.V.O.P., was dismissed. 2. Heard both sides. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that no prejudice would be caused to the respondents if such a plea is taken, in view of the fact that, the same has to be established by the petitioners herein; that unless a plea is taken in the counter no amount of evidence would be considered by the Tribunal, on this aspect. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for respondent No.1 contended that after acquittal of the driver of the crime vehicle in criminal case, the new plea is sought to be taken, and the Tribunal after considering the evidence on record rightly dismissed the amendment petition seeking amendment of the counter and there are no grounds to interfere with the same. 5. O.P.No.272 of 2008 on the file of District Judge, Karimnagar, filed by the Respondent No.1 herein seeking compensation for the injuries sustained by her in the accident. The petitioners herein are the owner and driver respectively of the vehicle involved in the accident. Neither the driver nor the owner had taken a plea in the counter filed by them with regard to non-involvement of their vehicle in the accident. The petitioners evidence was completed in part in the O.P. and it is coming up for further evidence of the petitioners. Now a new plea has been taken by the petitioners herein stating that the vehicle belonging to them has not been involved in the accident. 6. Unless a finding is perverse or not based upon any material on record ordinarily this court would not interfere the Judgment exercising the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Admittedly no plea has been taken by the petitioners herein in the counter filed by them with regard to the fact that their vehicle had not involved in the accident. It is not in dispute that the police filed charge sheet against the driver of the offending vehicle wherein the driver has been acquitted as the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt. The claimant has been examined as a witness in the Tribunal. Even when the witness is examined on behalf of petitioner no such plea has been taken or no suggestion is given that their vehicle was not involved in the accident. 7. It is contended by the learned counsel for the respondents that no suggestion was given to the witness that the offending vehicle has not involved in the accident. The present plea appears to be entirely a new plea, if really the vehicle had not involved in the accident, nothing prevented driver or the owner to take such a plea in the counter. The present petition appears to have been filed consequent upon the acquittal of the accused in the criminal case. That is why the Tribunal rightly dismissed the petition as belated one. No reason is assigned as to why such a plea has not been taken on the earlier occasion. 8. After consideration of evidence, the Tribunal rightly dismissed the amendment petition and there are no ground to interfere with the same. 9. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU. J MAY 31, 2010. YVL