HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2299 of 2011 ORDER: Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Aggrieved by the order, dated 02.05.2011, passed by the IV Additional Rent Controller, Hyderabad, wherein and whereunder the application in E.A.No.35 of 2010 in E.P.No.13 of 2010 in R.C.No.511 of 2006 filed to condone the delay of 759 days in filing the above E.P. was allowed, the petitioners approached this Court and filed the present Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. In the affidavit, filed in support of the petition, the petitioners stated that the first petitioner being the only male was taking care of the family of the second petitioner, who is his sister-in-law and they shifted their residence to Rahamatabad for getting spiritual treatment to the second petitioner and as such, the delay in filing the said E.P. occurred. When the said R.C. was allowed as early as on 12.09.2007 against the respondents and the same had became final, the petitioners are not expected to kept quite without taking steps diligently to get the fruits of the said R.C. by filing the E.P. The Court below had exercised its discretionary jurisdiction in passing the impugned order. In cases, where the trial Court exercises its discretionary jurisdiction in the applications, filed seeking to condone the delay, this Court shall not, ordinarily, interfere unless and until a palpable irregularity is demonstrated. Obviously, this is a case where the trial Court, having regard to the facts and circumstances, dismissed the application, exercising its discretionary jurisdiction. Therefore, I do not propose to interfere with the discretionary order, passed by the trial Court. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed, at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________________ JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED​ 24th June 2011 DR