THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.5751of 2009 ORDER: O.S.No.168 of 1981 was filed in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Rayachoty, Kadapa District for the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties. The petitioners figured as defendants 5 and 9 in the suit. Way back on 26.12.1990, the trial Court passed a preliminary decree and the same is said to have become final. The father of respondents 2 to 14, by name Abdullah Saheb, first plaintiff in the suit filed I.A.No.542 of 1991 with a prayer to pass a final decree. For one reason or the other, the trial Court did not pass final decree for more than a decade. In the meanwhile, Abdullah Saheb died on 19.06.2002. Respondents 2 to 14 herein filed I.A.No.1076 of 2008 with a prayer to condone the delay in filing the application to come on record as legal representatives. The application was opposed by the petitioners. Though its order dated 03.11.2009, the trial Court allowed the I.A. Hence, this revision. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the contesting respondents. It is no doubt true that the delay involved in filing the I.A. is enormous and that the trial Court did not devote any attention to discuss the contentions of the parties. The fact however remains that the preliminary decree was passed in a suit for partition and the final decree proceedings remained half way through on account of the death of the petitioner, who filed the I.A. In a suit for partition, the distinction between the plaintiff and the defendant virtually ceases to exist and any party to the suit, whether plaintiff or defendant, can take steps for passing of the final decree. Therefore, the principles, such as the accrual of rights in favour of one party on account of the failure of the legal representatives of the deceased opposite party to take steps to come on record or for setting aside the averment, do not apply with the same vigor in the matters of this nature. The petitioners cannot be said to have suffered any detriment on account of the condonation of delay. On the other hand, it would become possible for the trial Court to pass final decree and to give quietus to the litigation in the suit. Therefore, the civil revision petition is dismissed. Since the matter is very old, the trial Court is directed to pass final decree within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 02.03.2010 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.5751of 2009 Date: 02.03.2010 JSU