IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4340 of 2010 Between: Kolli Sambrajyamma ..... PETITIONER(S) AND Challa Ramakoteswar Rao .....RESPONDENT(S) HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4340 of 2010 ORDER: Petitioner, who is the 1st defendant in a suit for recovery of money based on a promissory note, filed this revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India inter alia seeking to assail the correctness of the order dismissing the application purported to have been filed under Order VIII Rule 9 CPC and Section 151 CPC with a prayer to permit her to file additional written statement. The only grievance of the petitioner is that subsequent to receiving report of the Hand Writing Expert which clearly goes to show that there is a material alteration in the promissory note, it necessitated for her to file an additional written statement and under the impugned order her request to permit her to file additional written statement was rejected. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner. Perused the material available on record. It is not that even though there is any such report in favour of the petitioner it is always open for her to take advantage thereof during the course of trial and raise any such pleas and objections. It is not necessary for every such advantage taking place in the process of trial, there should be any specific pleading or amendment thereof. Subject to the observation made above, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ B.PRAKASH RAO, J 1st October, 2010 CVRK