HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.6164 of 2010 Between: Jajula Malakondaiah …. Petitioner and Ketineni Prathiba …. Respondent This court made the following: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 6164 of 2010 ORDER:- This revision under Article 227 of the Constitution is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff to revise the order of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada passed in I.A.No.549 of 2010 in O.S.No.1176 of 2009, dated 11.11.2010. On respondent/defendant setting ex parte for not filing the written statement within the stipulated time on 26.02.2010, she filed the impugned I.A. to set aside the ex parte order passed on her and to allow her to contest the proceedings through power of attorney holder along with an application seeking permission that the respondent/defendant be represented by General Power of Attorney Holder. No orders are passed on the said application and the same is pending. The present I.A. was taken up for hearing and it was allowed. Questioning the same, the revision is filed contending that unless the defendant is permitted by allowing the petitioner to be represented by General Power of Attorney Holder, the ex parte order cannot be set aside. The lower court allowed the I.A. holding that both the parties called absent, no representation and the petition is allowed on payment of costs of Rs.200/-. It is not out of place to mention that from 04.10.2010 till 17.01.2011, the Advocates boycotted the courts and has not represented the matters when they were called. Under the civil Rules of Practice, whenever the parties wanted to be represented through General Power of Attorney Holder, necessary application has to be filed seeking permission to be represented by General Power of Attorney Holder. Since an ex parte order is passed against the respondent/defendant, unless the said order is set aside, the application filed by the defendant seeking to be represented by General Power of Attorney Holder, cannot be considered as he has no right to contest. In view of the same, no infirmity is discernable with the order passed by the court below. The Civil Revision Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J February 18, 2011 lmv