APHC010011712025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] WEDNESDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 165/2025 Between: Anapu Ramarao and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND Pamina Kurma Rao ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. M. SAPTHAGIRI Counsel for the Respondent: 1. CHALLA AJAY KUMAR The Court made the following ORDER: The defendants in the suit filed the above revision petition against the docket order dated 17.12.2024 in I.A.No.752 of 2024 in O.S.No.18/2023 on the file of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ponduru. 2. Respondent/plaintiff filed the suit O.S.No.18 of 2023 for recovery of an amount of Rs.14,68,740/-, principal being Rs.10,50,000/- lakhs on the strength of a promissory note dated 06.06.2020 said to have been executed by the defendants. The defendants filed a written statement. In Para No.13 of the written statement, it was pleaded that the suit promissory note was materially altered in collusion with the attestors and scribe who are the henchmen. In Para No.16 of the written statement, it was pleaded that a perusal of the 2 promissory note, it was scribed at two different occasions with two pens with two different handwritings. The defendants put their signatures on revenue stamps with the same pen during 2014. The plaintiff got the blanks filled up with his henchmen with another pen and filed the suit. 3. The trial in the suit was commenced. At that juncture, defendants filed I.A.No.752 of 2024 under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act. In the affidavit, it was pleaded that the principal amount was materially altered; the suit promissory note contained two different inks. Respondent/Plaintiff filed a counter and opposed the above application. 4. The trial court, by docket order dated 17.12.2024 dismissed the application. 5. Learned counsel for the revision petitioners would contend that the trial court failed to consider the plea in the written statement about material alterations. Learned counsel would also submit that the trial court failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it. 6. Sri G.Venkateswarlu, learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff, on the other hand, would contend that the trial court, by considering all the aspects, dismissed the interlocutory petition. The order does not suffer from any irregularity or perversity. 7. The point for consideration is: Whether the docket order dated 17.12.2024 in I.A.No.752 of 2024 in O.S.No.18 of 2023 on the file of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ponduru suffers from any illegality? 8. As seen from the material available on record, the respondent/plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of the amount on the strength of the promissory note dated 06.06.2020. In Para No.13 of the written statement, except for contending that the suit promissory note was materially altered, nothing was 3 mentioned about the material alteration. In the I.A., it was pleaded that the principal amount was materially altered and it is visible to the naked eye. 9. A perusal of the written statement filed by the revision petitioners, no plea was raised regarding the material alteration of the principal amount in the written statement. In fact, the revision petitioners pleaded in the written statement about two different handwritings only. The trial court considered all these aspects and passed the order under revision. 10. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, since the trial Court considered all the aspects and by assigning reasons dismissed the I.A.No.752 of 2024, this Court does not find any illegality in the order dated 17.12.2024 in I.A.No.752 of 2024 in O.S.No.18 of 2023. There are no merits in the revision, and the revision is liable to be dismissed. 11. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 19.03.2025 KA 4 185 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 165/2025 Date : 19.03.2025 KA