IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD SATURDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.3594 OF 2011 Between : T.Ramakrishna Rao @ T.Ramakrishina ... PETITIONER A N D Mohd.Asif Ali. …RESPONDENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 3594 OF 2011 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order, dated 04.07.2011 in I.A.No.137 of 2011 in R.A.No.35 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, whereunder and whereby, the application filed under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘CPC’) seeking to amend the counter filed in R.C.C.No.384 of 2007 by adding para 7(a), was dismissed. 2. Para 7(a) sought to be added reads as follows: “The respondent further submits that during the pendency of the case some subsequent events have taken place which has direct bearing on the case. It is admittedly by the petitioner in his cross-examination that only one son is studying in St.Joseph School and his age in the year 2008 was 13 years. Therefore as on today the said son by name Saif Ali is aged about 16 years and completed school education and doing intermediate at college level. Therefore the personal requirement on the ground of inconvenience for the school going child is not more as on today. When the said son is going to college the personal requirement pleaded is not available and continued at present due to lapse of time and the same is exhausted. In fact as per respondents contention there was no personal requirement ground even at the time of filing of the case. It is submitted that by passing of the time the alleged ground of personal requirement no more exists and stood exhausted, therefore, the Eviction case is liable to be dismissed on this ground.” The basis for filing amendment petition is admission made by the petitioner herein with regard to bona fide requirement of the premises in question. The respondent himself examined as R.W.1 in R.C.C. No.384 of 2007 long prior to 2007. No steps have been taken by him to file such a petition, soon after the aforesaid facts came to the knowledge i.e., after filing of the counter when the case was pending before II Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad. The said R.C.C was allowed directing the petitioner to vacate the petition schedule premises. Challenging the same, the petitioner preferred the appeal. One year after filing of the appeal, the present application was filed under Order VI Rule 17 CPC to amend the counter by adding para 7(a). Allowing of a petition under Order VI Rule 17 CPC is not automatic or routine. The petitioner must specify that in spite of due to diligence he could not amend the pleadings as provided under proviso to Order VI Rule 17 CPC. 3. Order VI Rule 17 CPC reads as follows: “The Court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to alter or amend his pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just, and all such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties: Provided that no application for amendment shall be allowed after the trial has commenced, unless the Court comes to the conclusion that in spite of due diligence, the party could not have raised the matter before the commencement of trial.” The affidavit filed in support of the petition does not disclose any due diligence taken by the petitioner for not filing the application when R.C.C. was pending before the Rent Control Court. After lapse of several years, the present application is filed, which appears to have been filed to drag on the proceedings. Considering these aspect, the Court below rightly dismissed the application and there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned order. 4. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ K.C.BHANU. J AUGUST 27, 2011. YVL