THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA C.R.P. No. 1907 of 2008 O r d e r: This C.R.P. is directed against the order dated 01.03.2008, passed by Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy, dismissing the application in I.A. No. 459 of 2008 in O.S. No. 1043 of 1998 filed by the petitioner praying to set aside the order dated 14.08.2007 and the consequential order dated 10.12.2007 and re-open the suit to enable the petitioner to proceed with the suit. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the orders under revision. On 28.11.2006 though P.W.1 was present and was ready for cross-examination by the petitioner-defendant, the fact remains, the petitioner did not turn up and was called absent. Therefore, he was set ex parte, and the matter was posted to 08.12.2006. Thereafter, the petitioner filed two applications in I.A. Nos. 4663 and 4706 of 2006 praying to set aside the ex parte orders dated 28.11.2006. The said applications, by order dated 04.07.2007 were allowed. On 24.07.2007 when the matter was called, the petitioner was called absent and as the cross-examination of P.W.1 was recorded as nil, the Court below disbelieved the version of the petitioner that that his right to cross- examine P.W.1 was forfeited on 14.08.2007. Further, on 12.11.2007, as the petitioner reported no further evidence, the Court below closed the evidence of the respondent-plaintiff and posted the matter to 19.11.2007 for evidence of the petitioner. On the request of the petitioner, time for recording his evidence was extended from 19.11.2007 to 26.11.2007. However, as the petitioner did not appear, the Court below as a last chance, directed the matter to be listed on 10.12.2007. As on that day also the petitioner was called absent and there was no representation made on his behalf either, the Court below closed his evidence, and posted the matter to 17.12.2007. At that point of time, the petitioner filed the present application. From the above narration of events, as contained in the order under revision, it is clear that in spite of the Court below showing being indulgent to the petitioner by providing him opportunity to cross- examine P.W.1, he did not cross-examine P.W.1 and on the other hand reported nil cross-examination. This apart, after closure of evidence of the respondents, despite adjourning the matter at his request, as the petitioner did not tender evidence on his side, and on the other hand, absented from attending the Court, and considering the fact that there was no representation made on his behalf either, the Court below closed the evidence, and posted the matter for arguments to 17.12.2007. While the matter stood thus, the petitioner filed the present application on 04.02.2008 praying to set aside the orders. In the absence of any reason shown by the petitioner as to why he did not adduce evidence in spite of granting time, clearly indicates that he is not interested in prosecuting the case, but filed the present application to drag on the proceedings. The suit is of the year 1998 and more than eleven years since the date of its filing, and considering the casual conduct of the petitioner in prosecuting his case, I am of the considered opinion that the Court below, has rightly refused to set aside the order dated 14.08.2007 and the consequential order dated 10.12.2007, and I find no reason whatsoever to interfere therewith in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. There is no merit in the C.R.P., and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _______________ N.V.RAMANA, J Dated: December, 2009 KSR