IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4704 of 2009 Between: S. Venkat Reddy ..... Petitioner AND Smt.Budala Pushpa Kumari and another ..... Respondents ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 03-09-2009 in I.A.No.198 of 2009 in A.S.No.11 of 2008 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Darsi. 2. The petitioner herein is the third party to the suit in O.S.No.74 of 1997, who was ordered to be impleded as second respondent in A.S.No.11 of 2008 by way of impugned order. The first respondent herein is the appellant/plaintiff and the second respondent herein is the first respondent/defendant in A.S.No.11 of 2008. 3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner stated that the amendment petition was allowed seeking recovery of possession of the property when the appeal is pending. 4. The main suit is filed for declaration of title and for permanent injunction in respect of the plaint schedule property. The said suit was dismissed. Then the first respondent herein filed an appeal along with two applications; one to implead the present petitioner as second respondent in A.S.No.11 of 2008 and another for amendment of pleadings in the plaint in O.S.No.74 of 1997 under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking prayer for recovery of possession of plaint schedule property. It is not the case of the first respondent/plaintiff that she was dispossessed from the plaint schedule property during the pendency of the suit or during the pendency of the appeal. Therefore, the question of amendment of plaint for recovery of possession does not arise when he is seeking permanent injunction. If any subsequent events took place after filing of suit with regard to change of possession of property there, must be an averment in the affidavit filed in support of petition when the petitioner/plaintiff was dispossessed from the site in question. Without there being a plea of dispossession, prayer to amend the plaint for recovery of possession does not arise. 4. Therefore, the revision is allowed setting aside the impugned order. It is made clear that the appeal shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible subject to other part heard and old appeals. ________________ K.C. BHANU, J March 02, 2010 PN THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4704 of 2009 March 02, 2010