APHC010210882025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI I THURSDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1120 OF 2025 Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved order dated 20.02.2025 made in I.A.No. 1387 of 2024 in O.S.No. 301 of 2016 pending on the fife of the Court of II Additional District Court, Guntur. Between: Bangaru Venkateswarlu, S/o. Bangarappa, Aged about 46 years, Occ: Business, R/o. D.No. 25-18-116/4, 1st Lane, Sampathnagar, Guntur, Guntur District. ...Petitioner/Respondent/Defendant AND 1. Annapureddy Krishna, s/o Siddaiah Business, R/o. H.No.8-19-1/50, Arundathi Nagar, 2nd lane, Guntur Aged about 43 years, Occ; District 2. Bysani Suresh, S/o Venkateswarlu, Aged about 48 years, R/o. D.No.25- 18-118,1st lane, Parvathipuram, Sampathnagar, Guntur, Guntur District 3. Bysani Karuna Bhargavi, w/o Suresh, Aged about 44 years, Occ: Parvathipuram, D.No.25-18-118,1st lane. Housewife, Sampathnagar, Guntur, Guntur District (Respondent No. 2 and 3 are not necessary parties in the CRP) R/o. ...Respondents lA NO: i OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying, that in the circumstances stated in the.affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in O.S.No. 301 of 2016 pending on the file of II Additional District Court, Guntur, Guntur District, pending .. of the Court disposal of the above CRP. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri A.K.Kishore Reddy, Advocate. Counsel, for the Respondents: Sri. Habibulla Shaik, Advocate The Court made the following order: APHC010210882025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ATAMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3207] THURSDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1120/2025 Between: 1.BANGARU VENKATESWARLU, S/0 BANGARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/0 D.NO. 25-18-116/4, 1ST LANE, SAMPATHNAGAR, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.ANNAPUREDDY KRISHNA, S/0 SIDDAIAH YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, NAGAR, 2ND LANE, GUNTUR DISTRICT AGED ABOUT 43 R/ O. H.NO.8-19-1/50, ARUNDATHI 2.BYSANI SURESH, S/0 VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 48 R/0. D.N0.25-18-118,1ST LANE. YEARS, SAMPATHNAGAR, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT PARVATHIPURAM, 3.BYSANI KARUNA BHARGAVI, W/O SURESH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/0. D.NO.25-18-118,1ST LANE. PARVATHIPU RAM, SAM PATH NAGAR, DISTRICT, (RESPONDENT NO. 2 AND 3 ARE NOT NECESSARY PARTIES IN THE CRP) GUNTUR, GUNTUR ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying that in the ^ circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to set aside the order dated 20.02.2025 made in I.A.No. 1387 of 2024 in O.S.No. 301 of 2016 pending on the file of The Court of II Additional District Court, Guntur, Guntur District, and allow the Interlocutory applications 2 lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in O.S.No. 301 of 2016 pending on the ■ file of The Court of II Additional District Court, Guntur, Guntur District, pending disposal of the above CRP and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.AKKISHORE REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.HABIBULLASHAIK ^ The Court made the following: 3 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 1120 of 2025 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition has been filed aggrieved by the order, dated 20.02.2025 in I.A.No.l387 of 2024 in O.S.No.301 of 2016, on the file of the Court of II Additional District Judge, Guntur ("trial Court" for short). Heard Sri A.K. Kishore Reddy, learned Counsel for the 2) petitioner and perused the material available on record. St rd defendant; the 1 The petitioner herein is the 3 respondent herein is the plaintiff and the respondent l\los.2 and 3 3) are the defendant Nos.l and 2 in O.S.No.301 of 2016. 4) The facts of the case are that the plaintiff/1^^ respondent herein filed the suit in O.S.No.301 of 2016 before the trial Court against the petitioner and other respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein, seeking for specific performance of contract. Pending the said suit, respondent filed LA.No.1387 of 2024 seeking to add alternative relief to pay advance amount paid by him to the defendants by way of amendment. On hearing both sides counsel, the learned trial Judge allowed the petition by permitting the petitioner/plaintiff to amend the plaint as mentioned in the St the 1 4 rd . consequential amendments. Aggrieved thereby, the unsuccessful 3 defendant filed the present Civil Revision Petition. 5) Learned counsel for the petitioner/3^^ defendant would contend that there is no nexus between the petitioner and the 1 St respondent, when the suit is instituted in the year 2016 seeking amendment in the year 2024 is totally misconceived and the trial Court allowed the same in cyclostylic manner which is totally illegal. He would further contend that the trial Court failed in following the law laid down under Section 22 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. The executants of the agreement of sale, dated 02.07.2014 are not contesting the suit and the relief of refund of advance amount paid to the defendant Nos.l and 2 cannot be sought against the 3 rd defendant, as there is no contractual obligation on the part of the Therefore, he prayed to set aside the order, dated petitioner. 20.02.2025 in I.A.No.1387 of 2024 in O.S.No.301 of 2016 pending before the trial Court. Learned counsel for the 1^^ respondent/plaintiff would 6) contend that at the time of filing of the plaint due to over sight, he has not prayed an alternative reHef to pay advance amount paid by the petitioner to the defendants. Hence, he sought for amendment of the plaint to add the relief of refund of advance amount by way of proposed amendment to the plaint. 5 Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the main suit is filed for the relief of specific performance of agreement of sale, dated 02.07.2014. It is the case of the plaintiff that he has not prayed alternative relief to refund advance amount paid by him to the defendants. Accordingly, he sought for amendment of the plaint to add the relief of refund of advance amount. The main suit is coming up for accepting the chief examination affidavit of D.W.l. The evidence of defendant is yet to be commenced. In view of the same, the learned trial Judge came to an opinion that if the proposed amendment is allowed, no prejudice would be caused to the 3’''' defendant and merits of the proposed amendment cannot be decided at that stage. Accordingly, the learned trial Judge held that the petitioner/plaintiff can be permitted to amend the plaint as prayed for. On consideration of the reasons stated by the learned trial Judge while allowing the petition to amend the plaint, in my considered view, for proper adjudication of the suit, the proposed amendment is just and necessary and by allowing the amendment petition, no prejudice will be caused to anybody and as such this Court is not inclined to interfere into the reasoned order passed by the learned trial Judge in allowing the amendment petition. 7) '\ 8) 6 9) For the aforesaid reasons, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. Sd/- G HELANAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The II Additional District Court, Guntur, Guntur District 2. The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 3. One CC to Sri A.K.Kishore Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri Habibuila Shaik, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies GPC m HIGH COURT DATED: 14/08/2025 ORDER CRP NO. 1120 OF 2025 DISMISSING THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION