IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5570 OF 2007 Between: Shaik Lalbi .....PETITIONER AND Chenna Ramadevi and others ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5570 OF 2007 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition, under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is directed against the order, dated 28.09.2007, in E.A.No.151 of 2006 in E.P.No.1 of 2006 in R.C.C.No.67 of 1989, on the file of the Rent Controller - cum - Principal Junior Civil Judge, Guntur, whereunder and whereby, the petition, filed under Rule 8 (3) of the Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960, to set aside the ex parte order passed on 04.09.2006 in E.P.No.1 of 2006, was dismissed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that due to fever the petitioner did not attend the Court on 04.09.2006 and therefore, an opportunity may be given to the petitioner to contest the case. 3. As seen from the record, it is not as though opportunity was not given to the petitioner. R.C.C. is filed in the year 1989 and the same was allowed on 16.07.1993. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner herein preferred R.C.A.No.13 of 1993 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, which was dismissed on 19.04.2005. Thereafter, when the Execution Petition is filed for eviction of the petitioner and delivery of possession, the petitioner herein appeared through counsel and the same is posted for counter. On 04.09.2006, counter was not filed and he was set ex parte. Except stating that the petitioner was suffering from fever, he did not state any reason as to why he has not given any instruction prior to the date on which he was set ex parte. Nothing prevented the petitioner from giving instructions to his counsel to file a counter on the previous occasion. Considering these aspects, the trial Court rightly dismissed the petition and there are no grounds to set aside the impugned order. 4. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J September 30, 2010 MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5570 OF 2007 September 30, 2010