Vankadaru Venkata Narayana Rao v. Patchigolla Naga Venkata Suresh Kumar

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN Civil Revision Petition Nos.459 and 1454 of 2018 Common Order:

The applications for amendment of the written statement in two different suits between the same parties having been dismissed, the defendant in both the suits has come up with the above civil revision petitions.

2. Heard Mr. Ravi Kumar Tolety, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K.S. Murthy, learned counsel for the respondent.

3. The Trial Court was right in dismissing the applications for amendment, in view of the apparent fact that the original defence to the suit, may get tinkered by the amendment. In the original written statement, it was claimed that the defendant borrowed money from the plaintiff's mother. Now the plaintiff's brother is sought to be introduced into the picture. This wisdom appears to have dawned upon the defendant, only after the cross-examination of the plaintiff. Therefore, the Trial Court was right in rejecting the applications for amendment. I find no reason to interfere with the said finding. Hence, both the civil revision petitions are dismissed. The miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in these revisions shall stand closed. No costs. ___________________________ V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J.

15th March, 2018.

Ak

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN Civil Revision Petition Nos.459 and 1454 of 2018 (Common Order) 15th March, 2018.

(Ak)