IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU C.R.P.No.3551 OF 2010 Date:24.03.2011 Between:- The Commissioner, Nellore Municipal Corporation, Nellore. ..Petitioner/Petitioner/Defendant And G.Stalin Babu .. Respondent/Respondent/Plaintiff ORDER:- The Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 25.06.2010 in I.A.No.607 of 2009 in O.S.No.773 of 2007 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nellore, whereunder and whereby, petition filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 to condone the delay of 356 days in filing the petition to set aside the ex parte decree, dated 01.07.2008, passed against the defendant in O.S.No.773 of 2007, was allowed subject to condition of the petitioner depositing half of the E.P. amount on or before 12.07.2010. 2. Heard both sides. 3. It is the case of the petitioner/defendant that the respondent/plaintiff filed O.S.No.773 of 2007 for recovery of money due under contract works. Soon after receipt of summons in the suit, he entrusted the matter to the staff and instructed them to approach their Standing Counsel to file vakalat on their behalf. He was under the impression that their Standing Counsel filed vakalat on their behalf. Due to oversight, they did not entrust the vakalat to their counsel to contest the matter. They came to know about the decree after the plaintiff produced a copy of the decree. Hence, they filed the application and the same was allowed subject to the above condition. Aggrieved thereby, this revision is preferred. 4. The Court has a very wide discretion in imposing such terms on the defendant as it thinks fit to condone the delay in filing the petition to set aside the ex parte decree. It may order payment of costs or may order the defendant to deposit the decreetal amount in an appropriate Court. If the terms are onerous or otherwise unreasonable, this Court can interfere with the order. 5. The trial Court has given a finding that the petitioner, being the Municipal Corporation, would be put to hardship, if the decree is not set aside, but at the same time, the interest of the plaintiff has to be safeguarded. Therefore, the trial Court allowed the application subject to the above condition. That condition cannot be shown to be onerous or not in accordance with law. Therefore, the impugned order needs no interference by this Court. 6. The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. However, three (3) weeks time is granted from today for deposit of half of the E.P. amount. There shall be no order as to costs. _​_____________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 24th March, 2011 AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU C.R.P.No.3551 OF 2010 Date:24.03.2011 AMD