HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5855 of 2009 Date : 07.02.2011 Between : M. Altaf Hussain. …..Petitioner And Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan. …..Respondent HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5855 of 2009 ORDER : This civil revision petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner in O.P.No.458 of 2008 on the file of the learned V Additional District Judge, Nellore, aggrieved by the order, dated 29th of October 2009, by which, the application filed by the petitioner for amendment of the O.P., is rejected. The aforesaid O.P. is filed by the petitioner under Section 23 of the A.P. Societies Registration Act, 2001, seeking directions for appointment of an arbitrator to decide certain disputes arose in the Society registered under the said Act. Counter affidavit was filed in the aforesaid O.P., stating that the petitioner was already expelled from the membership of the Society. In the said O.P., trial has commenced and PW-1 was also cross- examined in part, and at that stage, an application is filed, seeking amendment to the following effect: “1) Add the following as para 13(A) of the main petition: The respondent is contending that the petitioner having been expelled from His membership of the Nellore and Kavali Society. The petitioner does not Admit the same, no show cause notice was ever served on him. No Explanation was received from him. No opportunity was ever granted to him to explain his possession. The alleged expulsion is bad in law and void ab-initio. Further the amendments brought on the original bylaws are not valid. The petitioner had no notice of such meetings for the amendments brought on from time to time. Hence the petitioner is forced to seek a relief that the alleged expulsion is bad in law and not withstanding the same, he still continues to be a member of both the societies. 2) Add the following 17(1)(A) of the main petition: Set aside the alleged expulsion of the petitioner from Nellore and Kavali Societies.” The Court below, by recording a finding that the said application cannot be ordered in view of proviso added to Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C., has rejected the same. In this case, it is to be noticed that the O.P. is of the year 2008 and even after filing counter, the petitioner has not taken any steps in the matter, for amendment of prayer. When the trial has already commenced and PW-1 was cross-examined in part, any amendment at this stage, will definitely cause prejudice to the case of the respondent herein. The Court below, by correctly appreciating the proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, rejected the application for amendment. This Court is in agreement with the view taken by the respondent herein that no reason is given in the affidavit filed in support of the application, within the meaning of the proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, so as to allow the said application, at this stage. In the absence of any valid reason to get over the proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, and in view of the reasoned order passed by the Court below, I do not find any ground warranting interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. For the aforesaid reasons, the revision is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 7th February 2011 ajr