THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY C.R.P. Nos.649 & 740 of 2011 Date of Order: 01-04-2011 CT in CRP No.649 of 2011 Between: 1.Rompicherla Narasimha Kishore ..Petitioner and 1. Gurram Nageswara Rao and others ..Respondents The Court made the following Common Order: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY C.R.P.Nos.649 & 740 of 2011 Common order: These two revisions arise out of the very same suit— O.S.No.20 of 2010 pending on the file of II Additional District Judge, Vijayawada were head together and disposed of by this common order. In spite of service of notice on the respondents they have not chosen to put up their appearance. Defendant No.3 and Defendant Nos.1 & 2 respectively filed these two revisions against the orders of the II Additional District Judge, Vijayawada dated 06-10-2010 dismissing I.A.Nos.2804 and 2803 of 2010 filed by the petitioners herein to set aside the forfeiture order passed on 01-06-2010 while enlarging the time for filing the written statement. The only ground on which the petitions were dismissed by the lower court appears to be that defendants failed to file their written statement within 90 days as per proviso to Order VIII Rule 2(1) CPC inserted by Act 22/2002. No doubt, the said proviso was inserted only to avoid pendency and dispose of the suits at the early stage, but the same could not take away the right of the Court for enlarging the time to file written statement if sufficient cause is shown. The petitioner/3rd defendant in C.R.P.No.649 of 2011 stated that his counsel could not prepare the written statement on account of his pre-occupations; whereas petitioners/defendants 1 and 2 in C.R.P.No.740 of 2011 stated that their counsel went to Machilipatnam; therefore, they could not give necessary instructions to him to prepare the written statement which resulted in delay in filing the written statement. Since the suit is filed for specific performance of agreement of sale and valuable rights of the parties are involved, the Court ought to have exercised the discretion by enlarging the time. In view of the same, the impugned order passed by the lower court is set aside and I.A. Nos.2804 and 2803 of 2010 are allowed on payment of cost of Rs.500/- and Rs.1,000/- respectively to the Legal Services Authority, Krishna District within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In default both the revisions stand dismissed. The Civil Revision Petitions are accordingly allowed. No costs. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J. 01-04-2011 Murthy