THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY C.R.P.No.2937 of 2010 Date:16.07.2010 Between: Bathini Peda Yllaiah, Epoor Village, Nalgonda District. ………………..Petitioner. To Lakkaraju, Suryapet, Nalgonda District. ………………… Respondent. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY C.R.P.No.2937 of 2010 ORDER: This revision is directed on the written endorsement made in I.A.S.R.No.1277 of 2010 passed in I.A.No.340 of 2010 in O.S.No.3 of 2010 on the file of II Additional District Judge, Nalgonda at Suryapet. Back ground facts, in a nutshell, leading to filing of this revision by the defendant in O.S.No.3 of 2010 on the file of II Additional District Judge, Nalgonda at Suryapet, are: The respondent herein is the plaintiff and the petitioner herein is the defendant in O.S.No.3 of 2010. The plaintiff filed the suit for perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. The plaintiff also moved I.A.No.No.340 of 2010 seeking temporary injunction pending disposal of the suit. The defendant was to enter his appearance on 18.3.2010 in I.A.No.340 of 2010. Since he failed to appear before the Court on 18.3.2010, the leaned Additional District judge proceeded to pass the following order: “Respondent is called absent and set ex parte. Heard. Petitioner has prima facie case. He has been in possession of the property. Documents filed by the petitioner show the balance of convenience. Hence, injunction is granted as prayed for. Petition is allowed.” The defendant filed I.A.No.340 of 2010 under Order IX Rule-7 and Section 13 read with Section 151 C.P.C to set aside the ex parte order dated 18.3.2010 and permit him to proceed with the case. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition that he could not present before the Court on 18.3.2010 because of late running of the bus. The learned Additional District Judge returned the petition filed by the petitioner/defendant with the following endorsement: “There is no provision of law to maintain this petition. Hence returned.” Such is the endorsement, the petitioner is at liberty to represent the returned papers and invite the orders thereon. With the above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of reserving the petitioner to represent the returned I.A.S.R before the concerned Court within seven days from today. On such representation, the learned II Additional District Judge, Nalgoda District at Suryapet has to decide the maintainability of the I.A.S.R filed under Order IX Rule-7 and Section 13 read with Section 151 C.P.C and pass appropriate orders. Registry is directed to return the original papers forthwith. _______________________________________ JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY Date:16.7.2010 Note:Furnish CC by today. mrb