HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR C.M.A. No.3949 OF 2003 DATED:10.09.2009 BETWEEN: Mulpuri Umamaheswara Rao …Appellant and Mulpuri Subhadra Devi …Respondent COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT: MR.BHASKAR POLLURI COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT: MR.A.RAJENDRA BABU THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR C.M.A. No.3949 OF 2003 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) Husband filed this appeal questioning the correctness of the order passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, dated 7.4.2003 in I.A.No.1712 of 2002 in H.M.O.P.No.178 of 2000 whereby the I.A. filed by him under Order IX Rule 9 C.P.C. to set aside the default order dated 4.10.2002 dismissing the O.P., was dismissed on the ground that the appellant was not present on the date when the I.A. was taken up for hearing. Once the O.P. filed by the appellant itself was dismissed for default, the Court would expect that he would diligent in prosecuting the I.A. filed for restoration of the O.P., but even in that I.A. the appellant failed to appear before the Court on the date when it was taken up for hearing and therefore, the Court was left with no option except to dismiss the impugned I.A. Under those circumstances and inasmuch as filing of fresh O.P. seeking dissolution of marriage is not barred as per the provisions under Order IX Rule 4 C.P.C., we do not see any illegality in the impugned order dismissing the I.A. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. It is always open to the appellant to avail the remedies available to him under law to file a fresh O.P., if he so chooses. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. _______________________ SEPTEMBER 10, 2009 B.CHANDRA KUMAR, J. Tsr.