IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5391 of 2009 BETWEEN Chitikala Bapanna (died) and three others (LRs). ... PETITIONERS AND Cheurkuri Rama Krishna Rao (died) and another. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners: MR. K. SUBRAHMANYAM Counsel for the Respondents: --NONE APPEARED-- The Court made the following: ORDER: The petitioners 2 to 4 herein/proposed LRs, who claim as legatees, filed an application before the Court below to come on record along with an application being I.A.No.146 of 2009 in O.S.No.207 of 2009 seeking condonation of delay in filing the LR petition. That application was, however, dismissed by the Court below under order dated 03.07.2009 on the ground that it is barred by time. 2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, it appears that the petitioners have mistakenly filed the application under Order 22 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and in law, in fact, it has to be treated as an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC where LRs themselves want to come on record. No limitation is prescribed for such an application of proposed LRs and as such, there was no question of condonation of delay as wrongly understood by the Court below as well as by the petitioners’ counsel before the Court below. In the circumstances, the impugned order is set aside with a direction to the Court below to treat the petitioners’ application as one under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for impleadment as proposed LRs and it shall be considered after giving notice to respondents and thereafter, proceed with the suit in accordance with law. The civil revision petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J October 20, 2011 DSK