THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5875 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner filed O.S.No.349 of 2003 in the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kurnool against the respondents for recovery of amount on the basis of a chit transaction. The suit was decreed on 05.12.2005. Aggrieved thereby, the respondents filed A.S.No.94 of 2006 in the Court of the IV Additional District Judge, Kurnool. Through judgment, dated 08.06.2010, the lower appellate Court dismissed the appeal. The respondents filed I.A.No.246 of 2010 in A.S.No.94 of 2006 under Order 41 Rule 19 (1) C.P.C. with a prayer to readmit the appeal and hear the same on merits. They pleaded that the appeal was dismissed for default on 08.06.2010. The petitioner opposed the application. Through order, dated 10.11.2010, the lower appellate Court allowed the I.A. Hence, this revision. Sri G.Sravan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the appeal was dismissed on merits and if the respondents were aggrieved by the same, they ought to have filed a second appeal. He contends that by any standard, the judgment, dated 08.06.2010, cannot be treated as the one in default and the application under Order 41 Rule 19 (1) C.P.C. to readmit the appeal was not maintainable at all. Sri V.Prakash Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that though the lower appellate Court furnished extensive reasons in support of its conclusion, the fact remains that it was rendered in the absence of the counsel for the petitioner herein. Order 41 Rule 19 (1) C.P.C. is akin to Order 9 Rule 9 C.P.C. If an appeal is dismissed for default, an application can be filed under the said provision for readmission of the appeal, so that it can be heard on merits and disposed of. An occasion to file an application under Order 41 Rule 19 (1) C.P.C. would arise if only the appeal was dismissed for default. In the instant case, a perusal of the judgment, dated 08.06.2010, rendered by the lower appellate Court discloses that it is not only on merits, but also was rendered after hearing the counsel for the respondents and the counsel for the petitioner herein. The purport of the pleadings, the judgment of the trial Court, issues framed thereunder and the findings recorded by the trial Court were taken note of. Thereafter, the lower appellate Court framed as many as four points for its consideration. The points were discussed at length and the judgment was rendered on merits. Under these circumstances, it cannot be said that the appeal was dismissed for default. The application filed by the respondents was totally untenable. Therefore, the civil revision petition is allowed and the order under revision is set aside. It is left open to the respondents to pursue the remedy of second appeal, if it is otherwise available to them in law. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.07.04.2011. kdl