THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA C.R.P.Nos.497, 498, 499, 500, 501 502 & 503 OF 2007 COMMON ORDER: Heard both the counsel. The learned counsel representing the revision petitioners- plaintiffs in all these revision petitions would maintain that even if the reasons recorded by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur, be taken into consideration, they are not sustainable for the reason that the delay is in ordinate. The learned counsel also would maintain that mere awarding of costs of Rs.3000/- may not be just and proper and hence the orders made in these batch of revision petitions are liable to be set aside and the revisions petitions are liable to be allowed. On the contrary, the learned counsel representing the respondents-defendants would maintain that the learned Judge recorded convincing reasons, and though no oral evidence had been adduced, but by the consent of the parties Ex.A.1 to A.21 and Exs.B.1 and B.2 had been marked. In the light of the convincing reasons recorded by the lower Court, it is not a fit matter to interfere with the orders impugned in these revision petitions. These Interlocutory Applications are filed for condonation of delay of 765 days in filing the applications under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C., for setting aside the ex parte decree dated 27.08.2003, passed in the main suit. This Court had gone through the averments made in the respective affidavits filed in support of the applications, the stand taken in the counter affidavits, and also the documents relied on by the parties. In the light of the written arguments submitted before the Court of first instance and the documents placed before it, the learned Judge after formulating the point for consideration, recorded elaborate reasons at paragraph Nos.7 to 15, and ultimately allowed the applications on condition of the petitioners-defendants paying costs of Rs.3,000/- on or before 4.12.2006, else, the petitions stand dismissed. It is stated that the revision petitioners refused to receive the costs, and hence, the respondents have deposited the same in the Court. In the light of the convincing reasons recorded and inasmuch as the discretion had been exercised by the learned Judge, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the orders under challenge. Accordingly, these Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed. No costs. __________________ (P.S. NARAYANA, J.) 23rd June, 2010 Js.