IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.4166 OF 2009 Between : N.Kishan ... PETITIONER A N D N.Satyanarayana and another …RESPONDENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 4166 OF 2009 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order, dated 19.08.2009, in I.A.No.293 of 2009 in O.S.No.853 of 2006 on the file of XI Additional Senior Civil Judge (Fast Track Court), City Civil Court, Hyderabad, whereunder and whereby, the application filed under Order VI Rule 17 C.P.C. for amendment of plaint, was dismissed on the ground that the proposed amendment was pleaded in the rejoinder. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended the Court below ought to have allowed the amendment petition, in view of that fact that the rejoinder was allowed. 3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents/defendants contended that subsequent petition forms part of pleadings and there is no need to file separate application for amendment of pleadings and therefore, he prays to dismiss the Civil Revision Petition. 4. Under Order VIII Rule 9 C.P.C., reads as follows: “No pleading subsequent to the written statement of a defendant other than by way of defence to set- off or counter-claim shall be presented except by the leave of the Court and upon such terms as the Court thinks fit; but the Court may at any time require a written statement or additional written statement from any of the parties and fit a time of not more than thirty days for presenting the same.” 5. The above provision makes it clear that subsequent pleadings can come within the pleadings. In view of the fact that the petitioner was already permitted to file rejoinder and the same was allowed, there is no need again to amend the pleadings, because the Court below accepted the rejoinder. Hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned order and the revision is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. 6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU. J NOVEMBER 11, 2010. YVL