IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3722 of 2010 Between: B. Varun Reddy ..... PETITIONER (S) AND P. Chandra Sekhar Reddy and others .....RESPONDENT(S) THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3722 of 2010 ORDER: Petitioner, who is the plaintiff, filed this revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India inter alia seeking to assail the correctness of the order allowing the application purported to have been filed by the 1st respondent herein with a prayer to permit him to deposit the suit costs by enlarging the time from 08.06.2009 by condoning the delay of 84 days in depositing the suit costs. Heard Sri S.Ravi Kumar, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri K.Anthony Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent. Perused the material available on record. It seems that the petitioner has filed O.S.No.47 of 2005 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, which was decreed ex parte on 21.02.2007. The 1st respondent herein filed I.A.No.2456 of 2008 seeking to set aside the said ex parte decree and the trial Court, by order dated 01.06.2009, allowed the application subject to deposit of suit costs on or before 08.06.2009. Since the 1st respondent could not deposit the suit costs as directed and since there was a delay of 84 days in depositing the costs, he filed the present application wherein the impugned order came to be passed. The only grievance of the petitioner is that in the said application he filed counter affidavit denying the averments made in that application but the trial Court without considering the same passed the impugned orders. Admittedly, in the impugned order, the trial Court did not refer to the counter affidavit said to have been filed by him. In these circumstances, I consider it appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the trial Court for disposal afresh after considering the counter affidavit said to have been filed by the petitioner. The Civil Revision Petition is allowed. The order dated 13.04.2010 passed in I.A.No.2236 of 2009 in O.S.No.47 of 2005 by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, is set aside and is remitted to it for disposal afresh, after considering the counter affidavit, in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ N.V.RAMANA, J. 13th September 2010 CVRK