THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2103 of 2011 ORDER: Petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.115 of 2004. The learned District Judge, Guntur, passed an ex parte decree in the said suit on 17.04.2006. The respondent/decree holder got transferred E.P. proceedings to the Court of III Additional District Judge, Warangal. In E.P.No.18 of 2008, an ex parte order was passed on 09.08.2010. The petitioner herein filed E.A.No.13 of 2010 seeking to set aside ex parte decree, dated 09.08.2010. The Court below in the impugned order observed that as the decree was passed by the District Court, Guntur, on 17.04.2006, E.A.No.13 of 2010 could not be maintained. In this Civil Revision Petition, it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was a mistake in the prayer of the E.A. and it was mentioned as ex parte decree instead of ex parte order. During pendency of E.A.No.13 of 2010, the petitioner has not taken any step for amendment to the said part. I have also perused the E.A. filed before the learned III Additional District Judge, Warangal. Even in the said application, the petitioner sought to set aside the ex parte decree only. In that view of the matter, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order warranting interference. However, it is made clear that if it seeks to set aside ex parte order, dated 09.08.2010, it is open for the petitioner to file appropriate application before the Court below and if any such application is filed, the same is to be considered by the Court below independently without reference to the observations made in the impugned order. Subject to the above observations, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 2nd AUGUST, 2011. kvni