IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.2218, 2219 & 2468 of 2009 Between: Allu Bapanna and another ..... PETITIONERS AND Surla Lakshmi (died) and 3 others .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.2218, 2219 & 2468 of 2009 COMMON ORDER: All the parties to these three civil revision petitions are one and the same and these revision petitions arise out of various I.As filed in O.S.86/2000 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Narsipatnam. The petitioners herein are defendants Nos.1 and 2, whereas the 1st respondent is plaintiff and she filed the said suit for declaration and for recovery of possession. The sole plaintiff died on 09.12.2001. Thereafter, the legal heirs of the sole plaintiff i.e. respondents Nos.2 to 4 herein filed three applications i.e. I.A.Nos.16, 17 and 18 of 2003 seeking to condone the delay of 318 days in bringing the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff, to set aside the abatement and to bring them as legal representatives of the deceased. The defendants have taken technical objection stating that unless the abatement order is set aside, the question of filing the application under Sec.5 of the Limitation Act to bring the legal heirs does not arise. The learned Judge after considering both the contents and averments held that as three applications were filed simultaneously, there was some confusion and therefore, the applications are not properly filed. However, the Court below allowed the said three applications on payment of costs. I am of the opinion that the Court below rightly allowed the said three applications, permitting both the parties to proceed with the suit on merits and to establish their rival contentions. I do not see any infirmity legal or otherwise to interfere with the impugned order. These three Civil Revision Petitions are without merit and the same are accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 27.01.2011 Dsr