THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. NO. 2507 of 2008 Date of order: 17.6.2010 Between: Donti Venkaiah …Petitioner and S.V. Chandra Sekhar Reddy and others ..Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. NO. 2507 of 2008 ORDER: The plaintiff’s application for amendment of plaint with respect to boundaries of suit schedule property was rejected by the court below under the impugned order. Hence this revision. Heard both sides. The original boundaries shown in the plaint are as follows, North: Land belonging to Narasimha Reddy, South: Land belonging to Moorthy, East: Land belonging to Narsimha, West: Land belonging to Chandrasekhar Reddy and Indira Devi. The above boundaries are sought to be amended with the following boundaries, North: Land belonging to Narsimha Reddy and Yadaram Road, South: Land in Sy.Nos. 234/part, East: Land belonging to Narsimha Reddy and land in Sy.No. 234/part, West: Rajabollaram to yadaram village road and land of Chandrasekhar Reddy and Indira Devi. The proposed amendment of boundaries would show that there is hardly any change in northern, eastern and western boundaries and so far as southern boundary is concerned, survey number of the land is specified. In the western boundary the road is also specified, apart from the land of Chandhrasekhar Reddy and Indira Devi. The suit schedule property describes the extent and survey number of the suit land situated at Rajbollarum village, Medchal Mandal, Ranga Reddy district. It is, therefore, not as if the suit schedule property is being changed by the proposed amendment. The respondents have also not taken any such specific stand except stating that in a suit for injunction which is at the stage of trial, the plaintiff must be absolutely sure of the location of the land and he is excepted to describe the suit schedule property accurately in the plaint. The Court below has accepted the said objection and rejected the amendment petition. I am of the view of that since the proposed amendment merely clarifies and accurately describes the suit schedule property without changing the suit schedule property, the amendment petition, especially pre-trial amendment, ought to have been allowed by the court below. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and is accordingly set aside. The revision petition is allowed, the plaint shall stand amended as prayed for with liberty to the defendants to file additional written statement, if any, within six weeks from today. The trial court shall dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible, but in any case before the end of October, 2010. No costs. _________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Dt. 17.6.2010 KR