THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO C.R.P.No.313 OF 2011 ORDER: This Revision has been preferred by the plaintiff in the Suit questioning the correctness of the orders passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Medak, on 14-12-2010 in I.A.No.454 of 2010 moved by the respondent herein, who is the defendant in the Suit. The Suit O.S.No.47 of 2009 has been instituted for specific performance of contract dated 16-12-2005. The said Suit was decreed ex parte on 27-10-2009 and E.P.No.1 of 2010 has been taken out by the plaintiff. Thereafter, I.A.No.454 of 2010 has been taken out by the sole defendant seeking condonation of delay of 252 days in moving an Application to set aside the ex parte decree. Considering the same, the Trial Court, by an elaborate order, allowed the said I.A. Now, the defendant has an opportunity to contest the I.A for. The Trial Court has exercised the jurisdiction quite properly, inasmuch as it has assigned valid reasons for condoning the delay. The petitioner before this Court is the plaintiff in the Suit and according to him, pursuant to the order passed in the E.P., the Court has already got the sale deed executed in his favour. Therefore, as of now, he does not loose anything if the delay is condoned as the Suit can be contested in case the Court is satisfied that the ex parte decree deserves to be set aside for the reasons mentioned by the defendant. Further, the delay is not also too long a period. I, therefore, do not see any justifiable reason for admitting the Revision as the discretion vested in the Court has been properly exercised in the matter of condoning the delay in making the Application under Order 9 Rule 13 by the sole defendant in the Suit. The petitioner herein is entitled to contest the said I.A., on its merits. The Civil Revision Petition is, therefore, dismissed at the admission stage. No costs. --------------------------------- Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J mrk 9th February 2011