THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 2948 of 2010 Date. 25.11.2011 Between: The Zilla Parishad, Guntur … Petitioner And The Singel Trustee, Sri Nitya Annadanasatram and another … Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri G Elisha Counsel for respondents: The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 2948 of 2010 ORDER: This revision is filed questioning the orders dated 29.4.2010 in I.A. No. 1021 of 2009 in O.S. No. 11 of 2005 on the file of the Family Court cum Additional District and Sessions Judge, Guntur dismissing the application filed under Order 9 Rule 9 CPC to set aside exparte order dated 8.10.2009 and restore the suit. The petitioner herein is plaintiff-Zillaparishad, Guntur, who has filed a suit in O.S. No. 11 of 2005 for declaration of title and for a permanent injunction againt the respondents in respect of the suit properties. The case of the respondents is that the suit properties belongs to the Charitable institution and the plaintiff is nothing to do with the same and the suit is not maintainable. While the suit was coming up for trial, on 17.9.2009 none appeared for plaintiff and the matter was adjourned to 8.10.2009 subject to payment of costs of Rs.1000/-, however, on 8.10.2009 none appeared for the plaintiff and the suit was dismissed for default. Thereafter, on 28.10.2009 the plaintiff filed an application to set aside the exparte order. The Court below on consideration of the matter, by order dated 29.4.2010 dismissed the said application observing that though the plaintiff is aware and conscious of dismissal of the suit, leisurely after 20 days it has filed an application without any reasonable cause and explanation as to when they came to know about the dismissal of the suit and why the suit was not represented on 8.10.2009. Hence, the present petition. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner. Though served, none appeared for the respondents. Merely because the application to set aside the exparte order is filed after 20 days, it cannot be said that the said application is not maintainable. Admittedly, the application was filed within time, thus, the Court below ought to have considered the matter liberally to set aside the exparte order by imposing condition of payment of costs. The learned counsel for petitioner is not aware whether the costs of Rs.1000/- imposed by the Court below on 17.9.2009 were paid or not. In the circumstances of the case, this Court deems it fit to set aside the exparte order dated 8.10.2009 subject to payment of costs of Rs.3000/- (three thousand only) to the District Legal Services Committee, Guntur, within three weeks from the date receipt of copy of this order. It is made clear that the costs of Rs.3000/- imposed by this Court is separate from the costs of Rs.1000/- imposed by the Court below while adjourning the matter on 17.9.2009 and if the said costs are not yet paid, the same shall also be paid within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is needless to mention that in default of payment of costs as indicated above, the revision stands dismissed and the order of the court below stands confirmed. Subject to above, the revision petition is allowed. No costs. _____________ V.ESWARAIAH,J DATE: 25.11.2011 TVK THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 2948 of 2010 DATE: 25.11.2011