IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.No.2749 OF 2002 Between:- Ch.Gowraiah …Petitioner A n d T.Nand Kishore …Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.No.2749 OF 2002 ORDER: This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 12-04-2002 in I.A.No.1970 of 2001 in I.A.No.1971 of 2001 in O.S.No.1334 of 1999, on the file of the V-Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Courts, Hyderabad, wherein the said application filed by the petitioner/defendant under Order XXXVII Rule 4 read with Section 151 CPC for setting aside the ex parte decree dated 15-11-2001, was dismissed. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the records. 3. The petitioner is the defendant. It is stated that the respondent filed the suit for recovery of the loan of Rs.4 lakhs together with interest, based on a pronote, against the petitioner/ defendant by invoking the summary procedure under Order XXXVII Rule 4 CPC. The petitioner/defendant is denying his liability in toto and contending that the suit document is fabricated. The petitioner/ defendant entered appearance before the Court through the counsel and filed an application for leave to defend. It is alleged by the petitioner/defendant that his previous counsel did not pursue the matter and he did not receive any communication from his counsel and ultimately the petition was dismissed and an ex parte decree was passed. Thereafter, the petitioner filed I.A.No.1970 of 2001 for setting aside the ex parte decree. The respondent/plaintiff opposed the same. The trial court by the impugned order dismissed the said application on the ground that there are no such circumstances as contemplated under Order XXXVII Rule 4 CPC for setting aside the ex parte decree. Aggrieved by the same, the defendant filed the present civil revision petition. 4. Order XXXVII Rule 4 states as follows: “Power to set aside decree:- After decree the Court may, under special circumstances, set aside the decree, and if necessary stay or set aside execution, and may give leave to the defendant to appear to the summons and to defend the suit, if it seems reasonable to the Court to do, and on such terms as the Court thinks fit.” The above provision enables the Court to set aside the ex p a rte decree under special circumstances and also contemplates stay of execution, if found necessary. 5. The specific plea of the petitioner is that he had no communication from his counsel and, therefore, he was not aware of the progress of the suit and he was under the impression that the counsel was looking after the same. 6. It is not disputed that the matter ended in ex parte decree owing to the non-appearance of the counsel on the date when the matter was posted before the Court. Having regard to the fact that petitioner/defendant cannot entirely be blamed for the failure on the part of the counsel, who appeared before the Court on the date the matter stood posted though the petitioner was also under an obligation to be diligent and pursue the matter. 7. Having regard to the fact that the suit claim is heavy and the petitioner/defendant is totally denying his liability for payment of the same, it is considered just and fair that an opportunity is given to the petitioner/defendant to contest the suit so that the matter can be disposed of on merits. However, in order to safeguard the interest of the respondent/plaintiff, it is directed that the petitioner/defendant shall deposit half of the suit amount before the trial Court within a period of eight weeks from today and on such deposit the ex parte decree shall stand set aside and the trial court shall give an opportunity to the petitioner/defendant to contest the suit and dispose of the matter on merits. In view of the fact that the suit is of the year 1999, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the same within a period of four months from the date the ex parte decree is set aside. The respondent/plaintiff is at liberty to withdraw the amount deposited by the petitioner/defendant without furnishing any security. 8. In the result, the civil revision petition is disposed of with the above direction. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Dated 11th February, 2010 Lrkm.