IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.4941 OF 2009 Between : Surisetty Atchiyyamma and another .... PETITIONERS A N D Marupilla Jyothi …RESPONDENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 4941 OF 2009 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order, dated 02.03.2009, in I.A. No.66 of 2009 in O.S.No.1424 of 2005, on the file of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, whereunder and whereby, the application, filed under Order VIII Rule 9 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘C.P.C.’) to permit the petitioners/defendants to file additional written statement, was dismissed. 2. Heard. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners were not permitted to file the additional written statement consequent upon the amendment of the pleadings in the plaint. Hence, he prays to set aside the impugned order. 4. Order VIII Rule 9 C.P.C., declares that no pleading subsequent to the written statement by the defendant shall be allowed except with the leave of the Court and upon such terms as the Court thinks fit. The primary object of subsequent pleading is to supply what might have been omitted inadvertently or unintentionally or to deny or clarify the facts stated in the pleading of the opposite party. 5. No doubt there is a delay in filing the additional written statement, but at the same time, proper explanation was given for not filing the additional written statement for the reason that the previous counsel for the petitioners is replaced with the present counsel and subsequently, the counsel has noticed the said fact. From the facts and circumstances of the case, it can be said that it is a mistake on the part of previous counsel for not filing additional written statement after amendment of the plaint. For the latches on the part of the counsel, the party cannot suffer. Therefore, an opportunity can be given to the petitioners to file the additional written statement. 6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed setting aside the impugned order, dated 02.03.2009, in I.A.No.66 of 2009 in O.S.No.1424 of 2005 on the file of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU. J DECEMBER 15, 2010. YVL