HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 4357 OF 2010 Friday, the Twenty Fourth day of September, Two Thousand and Ten Between Sh. Ved Prakash Mehon Petitioner AND Smt. Sudha Saigal and others Respondents ORAL ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is preferred by the first defendant in the suit against the order, dated 8.4.2010 passed by the learned I Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, allowing I.A. No. 286 of 2010 in O.S. No. 4 of 2008 filed under Order VI Rule 17 C.P.C. permitting the petitioner and the respondents 1 to 4 herein, to incorporate paragraph 14(a) in the plaint. The respondents 1 to 4 herein filed the above suit for partition and separate possession of the plaint schedule property. They filed IA No. 286 of 2010 seeking to incorporate paragraph 14(a) in the plaint with regard to the conveyance deed vide document No.526 of 2000 dated 23.4.2000 and that mere getting a conveyance deed of the joint family property by the petitioner herein, does not vitiate the legal right of the respondents herein, in respect of the suit schedule property. The case of the petitioner – first defendant is that he purchased the property to the knowledge of respondents and mutation was effected. It is his case that his father late Shri Sukhdev Raj Mohan was only a tenant and he expired in the year 1960. After expiry of lease on 21.3.1970, in the year 1996, he opted to purchase the property and alone paid the entire consideration and conveyance deed was executed in his name on 23.4.2000. It is his case that there was never a joint family at any point of time muchless he was kartha thereof. On consideration of the material available on record, the court below allowed the petition, observing that the proposed amendment will determine the real question in controversy between the parties and no prejudice will be caused to petitioner and other defendants in the suit. Aggrieved thereby the present Civil Revision Petition is filed. There is no dispute with regard to the relationship between the parties. The petitioner herein claims the suit schedule property to be his exclusive property having purchased the same from out of his own earnings and the Conveyance Deed was executed by the Estate Officer to the knowledge of the respondents while the case of the respondents is that it is joint family property and the petitioner purchased the same from out of joint family funds. As observed by the court below, by allowing the proposed amendment, rights are neither conferred nor taken away from any of the parties to the suit. Thus, the court below is right in holding that the lis will be decided once for all by allowing the amendment and no prejudice will be caused to the petitioner herein by allowing the proposed amendment. Having regard to these facts, I am of the considered view that the court below is justified in allowing the petition and I do not find any reason to interfere with the same. Consequently, the Civil Revision Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari September 24, 2010 MAS