← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaCRP/2542/2017dismissed no costs

Dyaga Nagaraju v. Donthi Sudarshan Reddy

2017-06-12P Naveen Rao3 pages

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2542 OF 2017 DATED : 12.06.2017 Between :

Dyaga Nagaraju S/o.Rajeshwar, Aged 42 yrs, Occu : Business, R/o.H.No.3-3-92, Bangalpet, Nirmal Town, Adilabad District.

..

Petitioner And Donthi Sudarshan Reddy S/o.Malla Reddy, Aged 60 yrs, Occu : Retired employee, R/o.H.No.2-7-1300, Vijayapal Colony, Waddepally, Hanamkonda.

.. Respondent This court made the following :

- 2 - THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2542 OF 2017 ORDER :

Heard.

2.

Petitioner herein is the defendant in O.S.No.1 of 2015. Respondent/plaintiff instituted the suit on the file of I Additional District Judge, Warangal, praying to pass a decree for recovery of an amount of Rs.21,90,920/-; to grant interest @2% per month on the principal amount of Rs.18,70,000/-. Plaintiff filed I.A.No.906 of 2016 in the pending suit, praying to permit him to substitute the table in Para No.III at page 2 of the plaint. It was the case of the plaintiff that some wrong mentions were made in the table regarding the amounts reflected therein and the dates of deposit of amounts.

3.

On consideration of the rival claims, the trial Court noticed that even if the amendment as sought for is ordered, it does not alter the nature of suit and that would not take away the right accrued to the defendant. The Court below also noticed that the transactions as mentioned in the proposed table are already reflected and the relevant documents are marked as Exs.A.2 and A.3 and they are borne out of the bank statements. 4.

Having regard to the facts of the case, I do not see any error arrived at by the trial Court in allowing the petition. The trial Court has assigned cogent reasons in support of the decision in allowing the I.A. Thus, no case is made out by the petitioner for interference of this Court.

- 3 - 5.

Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Revision shall stand closed.

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J 12th June, 2017 Rds