while the amendment prayer allowed by the trial Court , the trial Court is to afford an opportunityto both parties to adduce evidence both oral and documentary in connection with the future mesne profits and after hearing argumentsof both sides, pass an appropriate order in final decree petition.
AP HIGH COURT
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.333 of 2021
Sadhu Annapoornamma
-vs-
Pelluri Venkata Hanumanth Krishna Murthy Sarma
ORDER:
The challenge in the Civil Revision Petition is to the order
dated 09.03.2021 in I.A.No.168 of 2021 in I.A.No.565 of 2011 in
O.S.No.30 of 2002 on the file of the II Additional District Judge,
Vijayawada, allowing I.A.No.168 of 2021 and amending the prayer
and incorporating the words ‘future mesne profits’ in the place of
‘past mesne profits’ wherever they occur in I.A.No.565 of 2011.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners Sri Gudiseva
Narasimha Rao and learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2
Sri S. Satyanarayana Murthy.
3. The main submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners is
that the petitioners have no objection for allowing I.A.No.168 of 2021
and amending the prayer incorporating the words ‘future mesne
profits’ in the place of ‘past mesne profits’. However, the petitioners’
submission is that since in I.A.No.565 of 2011 prayer was made in
respect of past mesne profits, taking the prayer as such, evidence was
adduced with reference to the past mesne profits only and no evidence
was adduced in connection with the future mesne profits, because
there was no prayer in that regard. Learned counsel would thus
request that the order in I.A.No.168 of 2021 may be modified and
while allowing the amendment, the trial Court may be directed to
afford an opportunity to both parties to adduce evidence with
2
UDPR,J
CRP No.333 of 2021
reference to the future mesne profits also for effective disposal of the
matter.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents Sri S. Satyanarayana
Murthy reported no objection.
5. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is partly allowed and
the order in I.A.No.168 of 2021 passed by the trial Court is modified
to the effect that while the amendment prayer allowed by the trial
Court is maintained, the trial Court is directed to afford an opportunity
to both parties to adduce evidence both oral and documentary in
connection with the future mesne profits and after hearing arguments
of both sides, pass an appropriate order in final decree petition. No
costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall
stand closed.
U. DURGA PRASAD RAO, J
20th March, 2021
krk
3
UDPR,J
CRP No.333 of 2021
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.333 of 2021
20th March, 2021
krk
