IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO : 2327 of 2009 Petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 9-3-2009 passed inIA No.126/2009 in OS No.30/2008 on the file of the court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kothapeta. Between: Khandavilli Venkata Subbarao S/o. Venkata Rama Deekshitulu H.No. 2-2-647/34 Central Excise Colony Bagh Amberpet Hyderabad 500 013 ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Chegondi Bala Mani W/o. Narayana Rao Opp: Mutyalamma Temple Ambativaripalem Munganda East Godavari District 2 Chegondi Narayana Rao S/o. Tata Rao Opp: Mutyalamma Temple Ambativaripalem Munganda East Godavari District 3 Chegondi Suribabu S/o. Narayana Rao Opp: Mutyalamma Temple Ambativaripalem Munganda East Godavari District 4 Chegondi Veerababu S/o. Narayana Rao Opp: Mutyalamma Temple Ambativaripalem Munganda East Godavari District .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.VL.N.G.KMURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CRP No.2327/2009 ORAL ORDER This revision under Art.227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner-plaintiff is directed against the orders of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kothapeta dt. 9-3-2009 passed in IA No.126/2009 in OS No.30/2008, whereunder petition filed under Order VI Rule 17 and Section 151 CPC to amend the plaint, plaint schedule and plaint plan in respect of the extent encroached by the first respondent/first defendant as Ac.0-04 cents instead of Ac.0.01 cents was dismissed. The petitioner-plaintiff filed the above suit (a) to declare his right, title and interest in items 1 and 2 of the plaint ‘B’ schedule properties corresponding to the property shown as F B G D and A E C G of plaint plan respectively and eject the defendants therefrom and put him in possession thereof; (b) to award decree for past profits to a tune of Rs.3600/- against the defendants with subsequent interest at the rate of 12½% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realization; (c) to direct the defendants for accounting future profits on items 1 and 2 of the plaint ‘B’ schedule property from the date of suit till the date of delivery of items 1 and 2 of plaint “B” schedule and to award costs. Item No.1 of plaint ‘B’ schedule is shown as Ac.0.01 cent and item No.2 of plaint ‘B’ schedule is shown as Ac.0-09 cents with specific boundaries. In the above suit, a commissioner was appointed in IA No.665/2008, who filed a report dt. 31-3-2009. The commissioner, in the light of the measurements, found that the first defendant is in occupation of Ac.0-04 cents of land of the petitioner/plaintiff. He also found that the third defendant has encroached Ac.0-03 cents of land to his east which is west to the petitioner/plaintiff and the first defendant has encroached Ac.0-04 cents of land to her west and east to the petitioner-plaintiff’s land. The commissioner has shown the encroached portions in his plan filed along with the report. On filing the report by the Commissioner, the petitioner-plaintiff filed the above IA No.126/2009 for amendment of the plaint, plaint schedule and plaint plan in respect of the extent encroached by the first respondent-first defendant as Ac.0-04 cents in stead of Ac.0.01 cents. The trial court dismissed the said IA only on the ground that it is not a typographical mistake since the court fee paid only for Ac.0.01 cents and the cause of action will be changed if the amendment sought is allowed. In spite of service of notice on the respondents, they have not chosen to put up their appearance. Heard Sri S. Subba Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff. In the suit filed by the plaintiff, schedules showing “A” and “B” schedule properties are appended to the plaint. Plaint “B” schedule properties comprises of items 1 and 2. The total extent is Ac.0-10 cents, the value of which was assessed at Rs.19,400/- ie., Rs.1,94,000/- per acre and a court fee was also paid on the said sum. The specific boundaries are mentioned for Ac.0-01 cents out of Ac.0.55 cents out of full Ac.1-50 cents. In view of the same, cause of action do not change as observed by the trial court since the Commissioner’s report also discloses that in stead of Ac.0-01 cent the first defendant is in possession of Ac.0-04 cents. To avoid multiplicity of suits, the trial court ought to have permitted the petitioner/plaintiff to amend the plaint by collecting necessary court fee thereon. In view of the same, the impugned order passed by the trial court is set-aside. Consequently IA No.126/2009 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kothapeta shall stand allowed permitting the petitioner/plaintiff to amend the plaint by paying necessary court fee on it within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. On such amendment being carried out, the respondents/defendants are entitled to file additional written statement, if any. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly allowed. No costs. ______________ A.GOPAL REDDY,J Dt.13-9-2009 kmr