THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3690 of 2010 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by the order dated 09.07.2010 passed by the Junior Civil Judge, Vikarabad in I.A.No.204 of 2010 in O.S.No.13 of 2004. The respondent/plaintiff filed the above suit for recovery of possession of the suit schedule property admeasuring Ac.0.5½ guntas out of Sy.No.3/A of Nawabpet Village. Originally the suit is filed for perpetual injunction and after dismissal of the injunction petition the plaintiff amended the suit for recovery of possession. The petitioner/defendant contested the said suit by filing written statement. The respondent/plaintiff examined himself as P.W.1 and also examined one more witness as P.W.2. After the cross-examination of P.W.1, it has come into light that there is no land of the plaintiff towards the eastern side of the road. Hence, the petitioner filed the present I.A under Order VI Rule 17 r/w Section 151 C.P.C to permit him to amend the written statement by substituting Para (b) with para (a). The respondent/plaintiff contested the I.A by filing counter-affidavit denying the allegations of the petitioner. The Court below, after hearing both the parties and considering the entire material available on record, dismissed the I.A holding that there are no bona fides and reasonable grounds to permit the petitioner to amend the written statement. Hence, this Civil Revision Petition by the defendant. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. From a perusal of the impugned order it is clear that the trial was commenced, evidence on the side of the plaintiff was completed, the chief examination affidavit of the defendant was filed and the suit was coming up for marking the document and for cross examination of D.W.1. At that stage, the petitioner filed the present I.A. seeking amendment of the written statement. Once the petitioner admitted in the written statement that there was land on the eastern side of the road, such admission cannot be allowed to be withdrawn, which would amount to totally displacing the case of the plaintiff and would cause irretrievable prejudice. In view of the same, the trial Court rightly dismissed the I.A. The impugned order does not suffer from any manifest illegality, warranting interference by this Court. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. N.V.RAMANA, J Date.01.10.2010 va