THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM Civil Revision Petition No. 4128 of 2009 Oral Order: Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri N.Shiva Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents. This revision is directed against the order dated 5-6-2009 rejecting I.A.No.1018 of 2007 in O.S.No. 35 of 2002 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Kandukur filed by the petitioner-defendant seeking condonation of a delay of 1644 days in filing a petition under Order 9 Rule 13 of CPC. The respondents are the brothers of the revision petitioner who filed O.S.No. 35 of 2002 for partition of the suit schedule property. The revision petitioner claimed to have engaged an Advocate to defend him in the suit and that the said Advocate filed his Vakalath but failed to file the written statement despite several adjournments. He was set exparte on 29-10-2002 and an exparte decree was passed on 28-11- 2002. He thereupon filed the application I.A.No. 1018 of 2007 seeking condonation of a delay of 1644 days in filing the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC to set aside the exparte decree. On the affidavit filed in support of I.A.No. 1018 of 2007, the revision petitioner claimed to have engaged an Advocate to defend him in the suit but failed to explain why no written statement was filed. He pleaded that the Advocate did not file the written statement while admitting that he was called absent on 29-10-2002 and that the suit was decreed on 28-11-2002. The revision petitioner pleaded no reason muchless any satisfactory reason for condonation of the extraordinary delay of 1644 days in filing the petition under Order 9 Rule 13 of CPC. Recording cogent reasons the Court below, by the order impugned, rejected the said application. This Court finds no error in the order warranting revisional interference by this Court. The revision petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. No costs. ________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J 26th March, 2010. GRR