THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 2600 OF 2009 Dated: 29.09.2010 Between: Yerrakkagari Gangulamma ..... PETITIONER AND Middinti Papi Reddy .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 2600 OF 2009 ORDER : This revision petition is filed against the order dated 20.04.2009 in I.A.No.1415 of 2008 in O.S.No.534 of 2006 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kadiri, under which the petitioner’s application to condone the delay of 407 days in filing the petition under Order 9 Rule 13 of C.P.C. for setting aside the ex parte decree was dismissed. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The material available on record shows that the respondent herein filed O.S.No.534 of 2006 for recovery of money on the basis of the promissory note dated 26.07.2003. Summons were served and appearance was entered on behalf of the petitioner. However, as no written statement was filed and as there was no representation on behalf of the defendant, the suit was decreed ex parte on 24.04.2007. Long thereafter, the petitioner filed a petition under Order 9 Rule 13 of C.P.C to set aside the ex parte decree along with I.A.No.1415 of 2008 to condone the delay of 407 days in making the said application. The Court below had declined to condone the delay of 407 days holding that no sufficient cause could be made out for the inordinate delay of 407 days. As could be seen, the order under revision is well reasoned and it is apparent that the learned Junior Civil Judge had declined to condone the delay on application of mind to the facts and circumstances of the case. Such order warrants no interference by this Court under Section 115 of C.P.C. as the Court below cannot be held to have committed any material irregularity in exercise of jurisdiction conferred under law. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. ___________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 29.09.2010 Ivd