THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.4582 OF 2009 DT.29.04.2010 Between: Muvva Tulasi Rao ………..Petitioner Vs. Muvva Duga Prasad and two others. …………………Respondents. O R D E R: Heard Sri P.Rajasekhar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri P.Phalguna Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. At the instance of both the learned counsel, the revision petition is being disposed of. The petitioner who is the first defendant in the suit filed the present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved against the order passed in I.A.No.630 of 2007 in O.S.No.55 of 2002 dated 07.08.2009 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Bapatla. The facts of the case in brief are that the application purported to have been filed by the petitioner/first defendant under Order 6 Rule 17 and Section 151 C.P.C., seeking to amend the written statement by adding para 5 (a) after para 5 was dismissed by the court below on the ground that the trial has already been commenced and the matter is coming up for arguments. Hence, the present revision petition. After hearing both the learned counsel and perusing the material placed before this court, it is seen that the fact that trial has already been commenced and the matter is coming up for arguments is not correct. Even as per the report, dated 29.09.2009 of the court below, which was called for by this court, it is seen that the matter is still coming up for the evidence of plaintiff and the matter is being adjourned from time to time. Para-2 of the order, which is challenged in this revision is quite contrary to what is stated in para-1 of the report, dated 29.09.2009 given by the very same Officer. Such an approach is highly deprecated. Hence, the reasoning given by the court below that the application is filed at the belated stage of trial is absolutely incorrect. While making note of the stage of the proceedings, the court should be very cautious and should reflect the correct position rather than giving false statements showing the incorrect stage. Since there is no consideration of the application on merits, the matter requires re-consideration. The revision petition is allowed. The order dated 07.09.2008 passed in I.A.No.630 of 2007 in O.S.No.55 of 2002 is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Senior Civil Judge, Bapatla, for disposal of the same on merits and in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the parties. No order as to costs. __________________ B.PRAKASH RAO J., Dt.29.04.2010 tjs