IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH day of june TWO THOUSAND TEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 5326 of 2007 Between : State of Andhra Pradesh Represented by District Collector, Hyderabad district. … Petitioner V/s. P. Ramana Reddy & Anr. … Respondents Counsel for the Revision Petitioner: GP for Arbitration Counsel for the Respondents : None appeared THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 5326 OF 2007 O R D E R : Aggrieved of the order dated 19-9-2006 passed in I.A.No. 919 of 2006 in OS.No. 148 of 2002 by the XIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, dismissing the application filed under section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking to condone the delay of 624 days in filing the petition to set aside the decree dated 06-11-2004 in the above suit, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader for the petitioner. Though served none appeared for the respondents. 3. The brief facts of the case are that in a suit filed by the respondent for recovery of Rs.12,15,990-92 paise with interest for the work done viz., Central Water Channel in Musi River under the Nandananvanam Project. The petitioner was set exparte and exparte decree was filed. 4. When the matter came up again there was no representation and therefore a decree was passed exparte. Accordingly, the present application is filed to set aside the exparte decree and also to condone the delay in filing the same. In support of the application, the petitioner has come out with various reasons though in legal manner. However, the court below did not find favour and dismissed the same. Hence, the revision. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, it is seen that the suit is a comprehensive in nature and it is contested by the petitioner. Though it has been stated that the written was ready but apparently it was not filed and there has been absence on the part of the petitioner. Be that as it may, having regard to the nature of claim set forth and also the fact that the petitioner is likely deny the same about its liability, which needs to be gone into. Therefore, an opportunity should be given to the petitioner to contest the same. The petitioner is therefore permitted to file written statement within a period of four weeks from today. The lower court is directed to dispose of the main suit on merits after giving reasonable opportunity to both sides. 6. With the above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs. ___________________________ JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO 17-06-2010. I s L THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 5326 OF 2007 CIRCULATION ENTRY No. 85 Date: 17-06-2010 Court Master : I s L Computer No. 43