Telangana High Court
CRP/6460/2016 of Chenna Rama .Rao, Vs Kukakula Padma, on 30 December 2016
SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.6460 OF 2016 DATED:30-12-2016 Between: Chenna Rama Rao and others … Petitioners And Kukakula Padma and others … Respondents COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS: Mr. P. Veerraju COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENTS: - THE COURT
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.6460 OF 2016
DATED:30-12-2016
Between:
Chenna Rama Rao and others
… Petitioners
And
Kukakula Padma and others … Respondents
COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS: Mr. P. Veerraju COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENTS: - THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
This civil revision petition arises out of order dt.18.10.2016 in I.A. No.1147 of 2016 in O.S. No.292 of 2010, on the file of the VI Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam.
Though Mr. P. Veerraju, learned counsel for the petitioners, sought to raise several aspects, he has finally submitted that his clients will be satisfied if the lower Court is directed to consider the plea of the petitioners relating to limitation with respect to various reliefs claimed by way of proposed amendments while disposing of the suit taking into consideration the date on which the application for amendment was made.
As the request made by the learned counsel is reasonable, while declining to interfere with the order of the lower Court, the petitioners are permitted to raise the issue of limitation, a mixed question of fact and law, with reference to the various amendments to the pleadings allowed by the lower Court, reckoning the date of filing the application for amendment, and not the date on which the suit was filed, for the purpose of adjudication of the question of limitation.
At the hearing, it is also represented by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the right of the petitioners for filing an additional written statement has been forfeited by the lower Court. The petitioners are permitted to file an additional written statement within two weeks from today. The lower court is directed to receive the additional written statement, if the same is filed within the above stipulated time, ignoring the order, if any, passed by it forfeiting the right of the petitioners for filing an additional written statement.
Subject to the above directions, the civil revision petition is disposed of.
As a sequel to disposal of the civil revision petition, C.R.P.M.P. No.8464 of 2016 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
30-12-2016
_______________________
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
bnr