THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CRP No.5627 of 2009 Date:18.02.2010 Between: Shaik Khajamiya, Shaligowraram village, Nalgonda District and others. Petitioners. And The Gram Panchyat, Chithaloor rep by its Panchyat Secretary, Nalgonda District and others. Respondents. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CRP No.5627 of 2009 ORDER: This revision is directed against the order dated 16.10.2009 passed in I.A.No.443 of 2009 in O.S.No.21 of 2007 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge Nakrekal, whereby and whereunder the learned Junior Civil Judge allowed the application filed by the 1st respondent under Order 6 Rule 17 read with 151 CPC. The petitioners herein are plaintiffs in O.S.No.21 of 2007 and the respondents are the defendants in the suit. The plaintiffs filed the suit for injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. The 1st defendant filed written statement contending that the suit schedule property is a Government land. Thereafter, the 1st defendant filed I.A.No.443 of 2009 under Order 6 Rule 17 read with 151 CPC seeking amendment of the written statement to take the additional plea that the suit is bad for non joinder of necessary party. The petitioners/plaintiffs filed counter resisting the application. The learned Junior Civil Judge passed the following order on 16.10.2009:- “Counsel for respondent No.3 and 4 reported that there is no counter. For enquiry. Heard on both sides. In the result petition is allowed.” The said order is assailed in this revision. Notice before admission came to be ordered on 5.12.2009. The 1st respondent/1st defendant entered appearance though a counsel. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/plaintiffs submits that the trial Court without taking into consideration the counter filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs proceeded to allow the application filed by the 1st respondent/1st defendant under Order 6 Rule 17 read with 151 CPC and therefore, the order impugned in the revision is liable to be set aside and the matter needs to be remanded to the trail Court for fresh disposal. The factual aspect of the petitioners/plaintiffs filing a counter resisting the application of the 1st respondent/1st defendant is not contradicted by the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent/defendant. Such is the situation, the order impugned in the revision cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the same is hereby set aside remanding the matter to the trail Court to consider the counter filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs and pass appropriate orders, after hearing the counsel appearing for the parties. The trail Court has to dispose of the petition within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ______________________________________ JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY Date:18.2.2010 mrb