THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY C.M.A.No.937 of 2006 JUDGMENT: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Order 43 Rule 1 of CPC being aggrieved by order and decree made in I.A.No.1503 of 2005 in O.S.No.277 of 2000 dated 3.4.2006 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry. The Appellant is the petitioner-plaintiff and the respondents are the respondents-defendants in the suit, which was filed for permanent injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. The said suit was dismissed for default on 2.9.2006. Thereafter, the appellant filed I.A.No.1503 of 2005 under Order IX Rule 9 of CPC to set aside the default order dated 2.9.2006. On contest, the Court below dismissed the application on the ground that it was identified case and a false statement was made by the appellant in the petition to the effect that he was intending to file a revision against the orders passed in I.A.No.185 of 2005 before the Hon’ble High Court and he also made a false statement to the effect that he had been to Tirupati and back to Rajahmundry only on 3.9.2006. Hence this appeal. The point for determination is as to whether substantial grounds are made in order to set aside the default order. As contended by the learned counsel for appellant no revision was preferred against the orders passed in I.A.No.185 of 2005, which shows that a false plea was taken to that effect for the purpose of gaining some time. Further, the appellant can file another suit for injunction subject to his legal rights. He should have approached the Court with clean hands and for not doing so, adverse inference has to be drawn. Therefore, there are no merits in the appeal and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. _________________________ G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J Date: 13.4.2011 DA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY C.M.A.No.931 of 2007 13.4.2011