HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH C.R.P.NO.3481 OF 2009 Dt.16.12.2010 Between: Nerella Appala Swamy and others ..Petitioners And Kuncha Sathyavathi and others ..Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH C.R.P.NO.3481 OF 2009 ORDER: Heard both the learned counsel. Petitioners herein are defendants in the suit O.S.No.89 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Narsipatnam, filed by the respondents herein seeking declaration of title, consequential relief of recovery of possession and also for past and future profits of mesne profits. The respondents filed the said suit as pauper and their O.P. was allowed permitting them to file as indigent person. It is stated that defendants have not filed written statement and they were set ex parte on 17.1.2008 and thereafter ex parte decree was passed on 22.1.2008. To set aside said the ex parte decree, petitioners herein filed application in I.A.No.254 of 2008 and the said I.A was allowed on 10.7.2008 subject to the condition of the petitioners/defendants depositing the suit costs. Thereafter, petitioner filed a petition under Section 151 C.P.C., stating that the order in I.A.No.254 of 2008 was allowed on 10.7.2008 on condition of depositing suit costs and there are no such costs payable and therefore the said order dated 10.7.2008 requires to be reviewed or modified. The said application was also dismissed by the impugned order dated 25.3.2009 on the ground that as per orders of the Court suit costs are not deposited. The perusal of the decree indicates that though the suit is decreed with costs, the costs are not reflected in the decree as the suit is filed as an indigent person. Any other costs incurred by the plaintiffs also do not indicate in the decree. Therefore, the question of paying the suit costs does not arise. Subsequent events to pay court fee and the fee, if any, paid to the advocate are not reflected in the decree. Therefore, it cannot be said that there was a default of defendants in not paying the suit costs. Therefore, I am of the view that the court below ought to have allowed the said I.A.No.254 of 2008 without insisting upon any suit costs. The civil revision petition is accordingly allowed. The impugned order is set aside and I.A.No.254 of 2008 seeking to set aside the ex parte decree stands allowed. The suit may be disposed of as expeditiously as possible on priority basis without any undue delay. No order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. 16.12.2010 kpr