THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3158 of 2009 Dated: 04.08.2009 Between: Jakkula Narsimhulu .. Petitioner And Jakkula Sriramulu and another .. Respondents ORDER: This civil revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order dated 23.04.2009 passed in I.A.No.1877 of 2007 in O.S.No.1345 of 2006 on the file of the VII Additional Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Ranga Reddy District. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.1 herein, as plaintiff, laid the suit O.S.No.1345 of 2006 on the file of the VII Additional Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Ranga Reddy District, against the petitioner and respondent No.2 herein, as defendants 1 and 2, for partition of the suit schedule property into three equal shares and for allotment of one such share to him. When the said suit is coming up for trial, respondent No.1 herein filed the present I.A.No.1877 of 2007, praying the Court below to amend the plaint by incorporating certain facts, at the end of paragraph 3 in the plaint, as paragraph 3 (a), and by altering the relief prayed for at clause (a) of the prayer portion as the relief of seeking preliminary decree for partition of the suit schedule property into three shares i.e. to an extent of Ac.10-13 gts. each to be allotted to the plaintiff and defendant No.2 and Ac.17.26 gts. to be allotted to defendant No.1. Petitioner herein resisted the said petition by filing counter. The Court below, after an elaborate consideration of the matter, holding that no prejudice would be caused to the petitioner herein by allowing such amendment, allowed the petition subject to payment of costs of Rs.500/- to the petitioner herein, by the impugned order dated 23.04.2009. Aggrieved by the same, the present civil revision petition is filed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order and other material available on record. From a careful reading of the impugned order, it is clear that the relief sought by the plaintiff by way of amendment is not inconsistent with the earlier plea and does not introduce a new cause of action. The Court below has rightly taken note of the same and observed that it is just and necessary to allow the petition filed by the plaintiff for proper adjudication of the matter on merits and to avoid multiplicity of proceedings. Since the amendment, which is sought before commencement of trial, does not affect the rights of the petitioner herein, I am of the opinion that the Court below has not committed any error in allowing such amendment and I see no reason whatsoever to interfere therewith in exercise of the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _________________ JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA 4th August, 2009 IBL