THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No. 880 of 2011 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice P. Durga Prasad) This civil miscellaneous appeal is directed against the order 01.03.2011 passed in I.A. No. 278 of 2010 in O.S. No. 176 of 2007 by the VII Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Vijayawada, dismissing the petition filed by the appellant herein, defendant in the suit, praying to set aside the ex parte decree dated 08.06.2010 passed against him and permit him to contest the suit. The counsel for the appellant contends that the appellant was absent only on 08.06.2010, on which date the suit was posted for cross-examination of P.W.1 and marking of documents filed by him, that due to ill health, the appellant could not appear before the Court below on that day and without giving him an opportunity to cross- examine P.W.1, the Court below decreed the suit ex parte in haste on 08.06.2010. The counsel for the respondent supported the order under appeal and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. We have considered the submissions of the counsel for the parties and perused the order under appeal and other material available on record. From a perusal of the docket proceedings in the suit, it is evident that after the suit was posted for trial, P.W.1 has filed his affidavit in lieu of chief-examination on 22.10.2009 and thereafter the matter was adjourned in view of the pendency of I.A. No. 294 of 2009 and on 19.02.2010, the said I.A. was disposed of and the suit was posted to 15.03.2010 for trial, on which date there was no representation on behalf of the defendant and the plaintiff reported ready. Therefore, the matter was adjourned to 06.04.2010 and on that day, the defendant was not ready and hence the matter was directed to be called on 27.04.2010. On 27.04.2010, the plaintiff was not ready and the matter was posted to 08.06.2010, on which date, P.W.1 was present, but as there was no representation on behalf of the defendant, the Court below set him ex parte and decreed the suit with costs as prayed for. From the above docket proceedings, it is evident that the appellant-defendant remained absent only on 08.06.2010 and without giving him an opportunity to cross-examine P.W.1, the Court below decreed the suit ex parte, which we feel is not proper. In the circumstances, the order under appeal is set aside and I.A. No. 278 of 2010 filed by the appellant is allowed, setting aside the decree dated 08.06.2010 passed in the suit. Since the suit is of the year 2007, we direct the Court below to dispose of the suit within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. If the appellant-defendant does not co-operate for the disposal of the suit within the stipulated time and seeks adjournments, the Court below is at liberty to decide the matter and pass appropriate orders basing on the evidence and material available on record. The civil miscellaneous appeal is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. _____________ N.V. RAMANA, J _________________ P. DURGA PRASAD, J 11th October, 2011 IBL