THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3826 of 2007 ORDER: The deceased petitioner No.1 filed O.S.No.517 of 1996 in the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Proddatur for the relief of declaration of title in respect of the suit schedule property, an extent of Acs.1.60 cents of land, against the respondents. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court on 06.07.1999. Thereafter, he filed A.S.No.50 of 2002 in the Court of the II Additional District Judge, Proddatur. During the pendency of the appeal, he died and petitioner Nos.2 to 7 came on record as his legal representatives, vide order, dated 31.03.2003. The appeal was dismissed for default on 01.05.2003. The petitioners filed an application with a prayer to re-admit the appeal. Since there was a delay of 1019 days, they filed I.A.No.515 of 2006 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The lower appellate Court dismissed the same, through its order, dated 15.06.2007. Hence, this revision. Sri T.D.Phani Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that though petitioner Nos.2 to 7 came on record in the year 2003, they did not feel the necessity to pursue the appeal on account of the fact that a pattadar pass book and title deed are issued by the revenue authorities in respect of the very same land and that the I.A. was filed at a later stage, when their rights were being denied. He submits that though the delay is enormous, it deserves to be condoned in view of the facts and circumstances of the case. Sri M.N.Narasimha Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that the application was defective inasmuch as the legal representatives of respondent No.2 were not brought on record at all. He contends that hardly any explanation is forthcoming for the delay of almost three years. It is not as if the petitioners were not aware of the pendency of the appeal by the time respondent No.1 died. Soon after his death, they came on record by filing the I.A. in March, 2003. The appeal was dismissed about one month thereafter. An explanation is offered for the delay of more than one thousand days by referring to subsequent developments. The suit was filed for the relief of declaration of title. Issuance of pattadar passbook and title deed during the pendency of the appeal in a way vindicated their stand and for all practical purposes, the appeal became redundant. If the respondents are still denying their right or have assailed the pattadar passbook and title deed, a separate cause of action arises either for the petitioners or the respondents. Therefore, necessity for filing an application to readmit the appeal, much less the one for condonation of delay does not arise. Hence, the civil revision petition is dismissed, however, by directing that the rights of the petitioners on the one hand and respondents on the other vis-à-vis the land, in the light of the issuance of pattadar passbook and title deed by the revenue authorities shall be adjudicated on their own merits uninfluenced by any of the observations made in the judgment, dated 06.07.1999 passed in O.S.No.517 of 1996. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:05.03.2010 kdl