THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.638 OF 2010 DATED: 17-02-2011. Between P.Subba Reddy … Petitioner-D1 And 1.P.Koti Reddy and others …Respondents-Plaintiff and Defendants 2 to 9 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.638 OF 2010 ORDER: This revision is directed against the order, dated 10-12-2009, in I.A.No.636 of 2009 in O.S.No.31 of 2007, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Addanki, whereunder and whereby, the application filed under Order XXI (a) and Section 151 CPC for the relief that there is no need to conduct denova trial in the suit to avoid multiplicity of evidence was allowed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that originally the suit was filed for injunction simplicitor and thereafter, the relief was altered to one under the declaration of title, that no opportunity was given to the petitioner to adduce evidence and hence, he prays to allow the revision. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents opposed the same on the ground that as the plaintiff himself has not adduced evidence after amendment of the pleadings, question of giving opportunity to the defendants to adduce evidence does not arise and hence, he prays to dismiss the revision. 4. The factual matrix is not in dispute. The suit was filed before the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Addanki, for injunction simplicitor. Thereafter, the evidence was let in by both the parties and arguments were heard and the matter was reserved for judgment. At that point of time, as the pecuniary jurisdiction exceeded the jurisdiction of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Addanki, a joint memo was filed by both the parties. Accordingly, the suit was transferred to Senior Civil Judge Court, Addanki. At that time, the plaintiff filed the above application not to conduct denova trial and the same was allowed. It is for the plaintiff to establish his title and possession. The plaintiff must stand on his own legs and he cannot derive any title in the weaknesses of the defence. Admittedly, the plaintiff has not availed any opportunity to let in evidence after the amendment of the pleadings. Such is the case, question of adducing rebuttal evidence by the defendants does not arise because both parties have already adduced evidence. The trial Court rightly allowed the application and there are no grounds to interfere with the same. 5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. --------------------- K.C.BHANU, J DATED: 17-02-2011 Hsd