HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:3395 OF 2011 ORDER: This revision is filed by the petitioner-plaintiff aggrieved by order dated 14.7.2011 passed by the V Additional District Judge, Vijayawada, in I.A.No.126 of 2011 in O.S.No.47 of 2008. On coming to know that the petitioner-plaintiff obtained an exparte decree of injunction against the defendants in O.S.No.47 of 2008 on the file of the V Additional District Judge, Vijayawada, the respondent-1st defendant filed I.A.No.126 of 2011 to condone the delay in filing the application for setting aside the exparte decree, stating that the plaintiff with a dishonest intention mentioned a wrong address of them and obtained exparte decree behind their back and on 21.9.2010, when the respondent-1st defendant came to know that the plaintiff furnished a wrong address of him in the suit, he lodged a police complaint against the plaintiff, on which basis a case was registered and the same is pending. In the order under revision, the Court below recorded a finding that the Counsel for the plaintiff admitted that the summons were not served and after filing the publication, the defendants were called absent and set exparte and thereafter suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiff, and that the defendant filed Xerox copy of gas receipt to show that he is a resident of LIG-493, Bharath Nagar Colony, Musapet, Hyderabad, Rangareddy District and the same was not denied by the Counsel for the plaintiff. It is also recorded that perusal of the process clearly shows that the address of the 1st defendant was given as House No.125, MIG Phase-I, Kukatpalli, Rangareddy District and therefore, the summons were not served on the defendants, which resulted in passing of exparte decree after publishing notice in Eenadu at Hyderabad Edition on 24.1.2009 and that there is also evidence on record to show that the summons were not sent to the proper address of the defendants. On such findings, the Court below allowed the application filed for condoning the delay by the order under revision. The Court below has rightly exercised its discretion by accepting the plea taken by the defendants that the summons was taken for a wrong address. In view of the same, I have no hesitation to hold that the order under revision does not suffer from any illegality or irregularity warranting interference by this Court. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ Justice A. Gopal Reddy Date:27th August, 2011 Nn. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:3395 OF 2011 27.8.2011 Nn