THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NOS.5509 AND 5510 OF 2009 DATED:06-12- 2010. Between M.Shobhana … Petitioner-defendant No.2 And 1.S.Padma and another …Respondent-Plaintiff and D1 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NOS. 5509 AND 5510 OF 2009 COMMON ORDER: These revisions are directed against the common order, dated 01-09- 2009 in I.A.Nos.1280 and 1283 of 2009 in O.S.No.464 of 2007, on the file of the III Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, whereunder and whereby the applications filed to amend the written statement and to reopen the evidence of 2nd defendant, were dismissed. 2. Heard both the counsel. 3. Proper explanation was given for not attending the Court as she went to Bombay to see her ailing relation i.e., her mother’s sister. She came down to Hyderabad and came to know that matter is posted for arguments after closing the evidence of respondent. After completion of evidence and arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner, the present application was filed. The reason being that she was not aware of the proceedings. She has some semblance of interest in the property as she is claimed to be a bona fide purchaser of the property for valuable consideration. Whether she is a bona fide purchaser of the property for a valuable consideration or not has to be decided in the suit itself. When substantial rights of the parties are involved, the trial Court ought to have given an opportunity to the petitioner to adduce evidence as she is claiming that she is bona fide purchaser for valuable consideration from the 1st respondent. The amendment sought for should have been allowed by the trial Court because without there being any plea, any amount of evidence is valueless. 4. Accordingly, both the Civil Revision Petitions are allowed. The trial Court shall fix a date and on the date so fixed, the petitioner shall adduce all necessary evidence. No order as to costs. -------------------- K.C.BHANU, J DATED:06-12- 2010 Hsd