IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2607 of 2006 Between: Veesam Satyanarayana ..... PETITIONER(S) AND Kona Varalakshmi and others .....RESPONDENT(S) HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2607 of 2006 ORDER: The only ground urged on behalf of the petitioner/1st defendant is to the effect that, in spite of the fact that the amendment was allowed as per the order of this Court in C.R.P.No.4318 of 2005 dated 13.12.2005, the 1st respondent/ plaintiff failed to amend the plaint and file a neat copy of the plaint before the Court below within the time prescribed as required under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and the same is also barred. Even though the Court below has by its order dated 22.03.2206, permitted the 1st respondent/plaintiff to amend the plaint and file a neat copy of the plaint which is illegal. Heard the learned counsel for both sides. Perused the material available on record. Since the petitioner has straightaway came to this Court soon after the impugned order was passed permitting the 1st respondent/plaintiff to amend the plaint and file a neat copy of the plaint without raising any objection before the Court below, it is desirable that all such objections be raised before the Court below and considered by the Court below. The petitioner can as well raise all her objections before the Court below. Without availing such remedy, the petitioner directly approaching this Court against such proceedings at this stage is totally premature. The Civil Revision Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. The petitioner is at liberty to approach the Court below and raise all her objections, which the Court below shall consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ B.PRAKASH RAO, J 15th July, 2010 CVRK