THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.NO.3792 OF 2008 ORDER: This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 09-06-2008 in I.A.No.422 of 2007 in O.P.No.546 of 2005, on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Visakahapatnam, wherein the said application filed by the petitioner herein under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 236 days in filing application for setting aside the default order dated 03-11-2006, was dismissed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears for the respondent. Perused the records. The petitioner is the wife of the respondent. She filed the OP for divorce against the respondent and also for maintenance. Respondent filed another OP No. 810 of 2005. According to the petitioner, both the OPs were clubbed together and posted for enquiry. When the matter was coming for cross-examination of PW1, she came to know that OP No.546 of 2005 was dismissed for default on 03-11- 2006 and the other OP is pending. The petitioner, therefore, filed I.A.No.422 of 2007 to condone the delay of 236 days in filing the said application to set aside the default order dated 03-11-2006. The learned Judge, Family Court dismissed the said application on the ground that the delay is not properly explained. The matter relates to matrimonial dispute. Connected proceedings are admittedly pending. The petitioner on oath states that she was under the impression that both the matters are coming together, but only at the time of cross-examination, she came to know that the OP filed by her was dismissed for default. There is absolutely no reason to disbelieve the said version, inasmuch as she has been prosecuting the other matters diligently. It is, therefore, considered just and proper that the petitioner is given an opportunity to prosecute OP No.546 of 2005 filed by her along with the other OP. In the circumstances, the delay in filing the petition to restore OP No.546 of 2005 is condoned and the impugned order is accordingly set aside. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY,J Rkk Dated: 11-2-2011