THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH C.R.P. NO. OF 5708 of 2008 DATE: 4.2.2011 BETWEEN: Vaddadi Vinay Kumar and ors petitioners And V Savitramma and ors respondent Counsel for the petitioner : Mr Karri Satyanarayana Counsel for the respondent no.1: Mr B Madhava Satyanarayana The Court made the following order: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH C.R.P. NO. 5708 of 2008 ORDER: This revision is filed questioning the judgment passed in I A No.421 of 2007 in O.P.No. 433 of 2006 dated 6.10.2008 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Visakapatnam dismissing a petition filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, declining to condone the delay of 81 days in representing the set aside petition. The notice sent to first respondent herein returned with an endorsement ‘expired returned to sender’ and no steps have been taken to bring his legal representatives on record. Hence, the revision against first respondent is dismissed. The case of the petitioners is that their father Mr Vaddadi Achyuta Rao, died while in service of third respondent /Life Insurance Corporation of India, on 28.12.2005 and they being legal representatives filed O P NO. 433 of 2006 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Visakapatnam for declaration and entitlement of 1/4th share in death benefits of their late father along with respondents 1 and 2 and also for grant of permanent injunction, restraining respondents 3 to 5 from releasing the death benefits to respondents 1 and 2. While so, on 23.3.2007 when the matter was posted for hearing, the mother of petitioners herein could not present before the Court due to viral fever and the suit was dismissed for default. As against the said order, they filed an application in I.A. No. 421 of 2007 for restoration of the suit with a delay of 81 days. The Court below, by order under revision dated 6.10.2008 dismissed the application and declined to condone the delay on the ground that the petitioners have not explained the day today delay. Hence, the present revision. Though no sufficient reasons have been shown for condonation of delay of 81 days, the Court below ought to have provided an opportunity to the petitioners by condoning the delay subject to certain conditions, so as to give quietus to proceedings by consideration of the matter and disposal on merits. Hence, the order under revision dated 6.10.2008 is set aside subject to condition of petitioner depositing costs of Rs.250/- (Rupees two hundred and fifty only) to the District Legal Services Authority, Visakapatnam within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. On payment of such costs, the Court below may proceed further in the matter in accordance with law. Subject to above, the revision stands allowed. No costs. ______________ V ESWARAIAH,J DATE: 4.2.2011 TVK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH C.R.P. NO. 5708 of 2008 DATE:4.2.2010