HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH C.R.P.NO.161 OF 2010 Dt.26.3.2010 Between: Shamaladevi .. Petitioner And V.Chandrashekar and others .. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH C.R.P.NO.161 OF 2010 ORDER: Petitioner herein is the 1st defendant in the suit O.S.No.35 of 2001 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Chittoor, filed by respondents 1 and 2 herein against the petitioner herein and the 3rd respondent. The suit was filed for recovery of money. During the pendency of the suit, the 2nd plaintiff died on 31.1.2007. The 1st plaintiff filed an application in I.A.No.1001 of 2007 in the said suit to condone the delay of 192 days in filing the petition to set aside the abatement against the 2nd plaintiff on the ground that his sister died on 31.1.2007 leaving behind her, her husband and two children as her legal heirs, who have succeeded to her estate, and as he was away from Bangalore and went to Seattle in U.S.A on business trip and in the meanwhile his sister died and he came back to India only on 2.11.2007 and filed the said application on 9.12.2007. The court below allowed the said application by order, dated 10.11.2009. Aggrieved by the same this C.R.P. is filed by the 1st defendant. When the 2nd plaintiff died, it is open for the 1st plaintiff as well as legal heirs of the 2nd plaintiff to file an application for setting aside abatement order as well as to bring the legal representatives of the deceased 2nd plaintiff on record. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the 1st plaintiff was said to have been in U.S.A till 2.11.2007 and therefore it cannot be said that the delay of 192 days is not properly explained. He filed the affidavit stating that he was out of India and returned back to India only on 2.11.2007 and immediately thereafter he has filed the said application. The major part of the delay was while he was in U.S.A only. It is stated that when he came back to India on 2.11.2007, he was busy with the pending work which was accumulated on account of his long stay in U.S.A and hence he could not go to the lawyer to instruct him to file the petition to bring the legal representatives of the deceased 2nd plaintiff. Therefore, I am of the opinion that sufficient cause has been shown by the 1st plaintiff to condone the delay of 192 days in filing the said application and the court below has rightly condoned the said delay of 192 days in filing application seeking to set aside the abatement. I do not see any infirmity legal or otherwise in the impugned order. The civil revision petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _______________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. 26.3.2010 kpr