THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1846 of 2011 Dated:05.11.2011 Between: Dwarampudi Somi Reddy. …Petitioner and Sathi Satyanarayana Reddy, And others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1846 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.12 of 2009 on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Anaparthy. The suit was filed for permanent injunction. It was alleged in the plaint that the plaintiff purchased the suit schedule property under registered sale deed and that the defendants are interfering with their possession. Though the plaintiff – Dwarampudi Somi Reddy, was the Proprietor of M/s.Sri Devi Poultries, a proprietary concern, it was described in the plaint as “Dwarampudi Somi Reddy, Managing Director of Sridevi Poultries (P) Limited”. Visualising this, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.33 of 2009 to amend the cause title in the plaint. The same was dismissed. Subsequently, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.352 of 2010 to implead the Proprietor, which was also dismissed. Thereafter, plaintiff filed I.A.No.472 of 2010 seeking permission to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit. The said application filed under Order XXIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, having been dismissed by the impugned order on 05.10.2010, the petitioner filed the instant Civil Revision Petition. This Court ordered notice to the respondents. After receiving notice, the respondents are represented by a Counsel. He would contend that the sale deed under which the plaintiff purchased the property itself was obtained in the name of Sridevi Poultries (P) Limited, and therefore, though there cannot be any objection for permitting the plaintiff to withdraw the suit, liberty cannot be reserved to file a fresh suit. It is brought to our notice by the Counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff that the sale deed has since been rectified under a rectification deed describing the vendee properly. Be that as it is, when plaintiff by inadvertence described himself wrongly and seeks permission to withdraw the suit with liberty to file fresh suit, no prejudice would be caused to the defendants. Therefore, this Court is convinced that the Court below has committed an error by improperly exercising the jurisdiction vested in it. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. I.A.No.472 of 2010 in O.S.No.12 of 2009 shall stand allowed and the said suit shall stand dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner/plaintiff to file a fresh suit, if so advised. As and when such suit is filed, the defendants can raise all their pleas in defence. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 05.11.2011 vs