HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.1804 and 1805 of 2009 COMMON ORDER: Since both matters arise out of the same suit, they are being taken up together for disposal. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Though served, none appears for the respondent herein. The petitioner in these two revision petitions is the defendant who is aggrieved against the orders dismissing an application for condonation of delay in filing an application under Order IX Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking to set aside the ex parte order dated 09/07/2007. Now, it is stated that he has filed a written statement along with the application and further the absence is only due to the fact that the counsel could not note the date in the diary and the absence is accidental. The Court below did not find favour with the reasoning given by the petitioner and dismissed the application. Hence, the revision petitions. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also on perusal of the material on record, it is seen that apparently the suit is one for recovery of rents and the petitioner has already filed written statement along with these applications. For the reason that the counsel did not note the date in the diary, the party cannot be put to any hardship or loss. The Court below should have given an opportunity to contest the matter on merits. In view of the same, both the Civil Revision Petitions are allowed. The delay is condoned and the ex parte order dated 09/07/2007 is set aside and the lower Court shall dispose of the suit in accordance with law after giving notice and opportunity to both sides. No order as to costs. _________________ B.PRAKASH RAO, J Date: 09th October, 2009 SKM