THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2313 of 2008 Dated: 10.03.2011 Between: Ummadi Shakuntala & others. …..Petitioners And Goparaju Mallapa Raju …..Respondent THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2313 of 2008 ORDER: Heard Smt. D.Radhika, Counsel for the petitioners. It is seen that notices were served on the respondent, but, there is no representation for him. Petitioners in this Civil Revision Petition, are the defendants in O.S.No.167 of 2004 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Gurazala. They suffered ex parte decree dated 10.8.2004 in the said suit. The other details are not necessary. They filed I.A.No.1234 of 2004 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning delay of 30 days in order to enable them to file a further petition under Order IX Rule 13 C.P.C. to set aside the ex parte decree. The learned Junior Civil Judge dismissed I.A.No.1234 of 2004 on 3.3.2005 on the ground that on that particular day the defendants, i.e., petitioners herein did not pay the process even though the matter was kept pending till 5-00 p.m. Thereafter the petitioners filed I.A.No.435 of 2005 to set aside the dismissal of the said order in I.A.No.1234 of 2004, mentioning the provision as Order IX Rule 9 C.P.C. The learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Gurazala dismissed I.A.No.435 of 2005 also on 25.12.2007 observing that the defendants, i.e., the petitioners in the said petition, did not show any interest to proceed with that petition also. Questioning that order, the defendants have come up with this revision. The learned Counsel for the defendants/petitioners points out that the defendants/petitioners are residents of Vizianagaram and the Principal Junior Judge Court is at Gurazala and that they have no idea of the proceedings and by the time they came to know, the matter was already delayed. Smt. D.Radhika, learned Counsel for the petitioners pointed out that even on the date on which I.A.No.1234 of 2004 was dismissed for non payment of process, defendants have no idea about the Court procedure and their Counsel did not appear before the Court. Added to this, she also pointed out that for restoration of a petition which has been dismissed for non payment of process notices to other side are not necessary and that is a matter between the Court and the party as such a petition would fall under Order 9 Rule 4 C.P.C. and therefore, the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Gurazala ought to have allowed I.A.No.435 of 2005 on that ground. She then pointed out that in para 4 of the impugned order the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Gurazala made a cryptic observation that as the petitioners did not show any interest to prosecute that petition, he dismissed that petition and this observation is also not founded on any sufficient reason. I have gone through the impugned order dated 25.12.2007 of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Gurazala. I agree with the contentions advanced by Smt.D.Radhika that in para 4 of the impugned order, the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Gurazala simply made an observation that the petitioners therein did not show any interest. This approach may not said to be correct. It may also be noted that the said I.A.No.435 of 2005 was filed for restoration of the earlier I.A.No.1234 of 2004, which was dismissed for non payment of process. In such a situation, the leaned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Gurazala ought to have considered I.A.No.435 of 2005 to find out whether there was any sufficient cause for the petitioners for not paying process in the earlier I.A.No.1234 of 2004 and should have considered the matter in that perspective. In the above circumstances, I am of the view that the order of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Gurazala cannot be allowed to stand. It is, accordingly, set aside and the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Gurazala shall now take up I.A.No.435 of 2005 and dispose it of in accordance with law. The Civil Revision Petition is, accordingly, allowed. No costs. _________________________ JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR Date: 10.03.2011 Tjmr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2313 of 2008 DATE: 10.03.2011