HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENAKUMARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:868 OF 2010 Dated: 11.3.2010 Between: 1. Mr. Jahangir Bee and others. ..Petitioners And 1. Mohd. Aziz and others. .. Respondents. This Court made the following HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENAKUMARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:868 OF 2010 ORDER: Aggrieved by order dated 1.12.2009 in I.A.No.1920 of 2009 in O.S.No.31 of 2007 passed by the learned III Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, the present civil revision petition has been preferred. The petitioners herein are the defendants 1 to 3 and the respondents herein are the plaintiff and defendants 4 and 5 before the Court below. The defendants 1 to 3 filed the above application seeking to condone the delay of 775 days in filing the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC to set aside the exparte order dated 7.8.2007, on the ground that the summonses were not served on them and they came to know about the exparte decree only on 23.7.2009, when the advocate- Commissioner came to the suit schedule property, and thus, the delay occurred. The Court below dismissed the above application. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the present revision petition has been filed. Heard the learned Counsel and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the order impugned goes to show that the summonses were served on defendants 1 to 3 personally in the month of January, 2007 itself and they remained exparte and subsequently, in the final decree proceedings, when the notices were ordered, defendants 1 to 3 refused to receive the same and remained exparte and subsequently, the Commissioner was appointed. It is not in dispute that the Commissioner inspected the suit schedule property on 23.7.2009 and the present application was filed on 29.10.2009. If the petitioners-defendants 1 to 3 were diligent in pursuing the matter, they ought to have filed the present application immediately after the inspection by the Advocate-Commissioner. But the present application was filed nearly after a period of three months. In view of the above circumstances, I feel that there are no bonafides on the part of the petitioners-defendants 1 to 3 and that the reason assigned by the petitioners is not convincing to condone such inordinate delay. In this view of the matter and in view of the observations made by the Court below, I feel that the order impugned does not suffer from any illegality or irregularity warranting interference by this Court. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari Date: 11th March, 2010 Nn. HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENAKUMARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:868 OF 2010 11.03.2010