THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU C.R.P.No.6328 of 2009 ORAL ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition under Section 115 of C.P.C. is filed questioning the order dated 14.09.2009 made in I.A.No.984 of 2009 in I.A.No.582 of 2008 in O.S.No.93 of 2007 on the file of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nellore, whereunder the application filed under Section 148 of CPC seeking to enlarge the time for 15 days for deposing the suit costs, was dismissed. Petitioners are defendants and respondents are plaintiffs in the suit O.S.No.93 of 2007, which was filed for specific performance of contract. The said suit was decreed ex parte on 2.5.2008. Petitioners filed application under Order 9 Rule 13 of CPC seeking to set aside the ex parte decree. However, the said application was allowed by order dated 7.9.2009 on condition of depositing suit costs on or before 14.9.2009. On 14.9.2009, petitioners filed the present application seeking further time of 15 days for depositing the suit costs and the same was dismissed on 14.9.2009. Hence this C.R.P. The learned counsel for petitioners states that second petitioner is staying at Hyderabad and suddenly he fell ill, therefore, first petitioner rushed to Hyderabad for attending him. Under those circumstances, first petitioner instructed her counsel in the Lower Court to file the present application seeking enlargement of time. The said application was however dismissed. According to the learned counsel, there was no delay in filing the present application nor can it be called as unreasonable for seeking time for depositing suit costs under the peculiar circumstances of the case. Therefore, dismissal of such application is arbitrary and illegal. Whereas the learned counsel for respondents supported the order passed by the Court below and stated that they were not served with any notice and apart from that, no plausible reasons have been furnished by the petitioner seeking enlargement of time for depositing suit costs. Heard both sides and perused the material made available on record. Admittedly, the application filed for setting aside the ex parte decree was allowed by order dated 7.9.2009 on condition of depositing suit costs within a period of one week. The matter was posted to 14.9.2009 for compliance. However, it appears, petitioners filed application on 14.9.2009 itself seeking enlargement of time on the ground that first petitioner was not in town and was in Hyderabad, and such application was dismissed on 14.9.2009. I am of the view that the Court below has made a pedantic approach in dismissing the said application filed under Section 148 CPC. The Court below should have given reasonable time for complying the order dated 7.9.2009, instead of dismissed the same. I am of the opinion that the Court below should have shown some lenience in a matter of this nature where the suit itself is restored on condition of depositing suit costs. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. In the result, the C.R.P. is allowed and the order dated 14.09.2009 made in I.A.No.984 of 2009 in I.A.No.582 of 2008 in O.S.No.93 of 2007 is set aside. Accordingly, I.A.No.984 of 2009 is allowed granting two more weeks time from the date of receipt of this order, subject to payment of costs of Rs.1,000/- to the learned counsel appearing for respondents in the C.R.P. However, it is desirable that the suit shall be disposed of, as early as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 25.2.2010 DA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU C.R.P.No.6328 of 2009 25.2.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU C.R.P.No.6328 of 2009 Date: 25th February, 2010 Between: Koduru Suneethamma & others. .. Petitioners And Koduru Suresh Reddy & another. .. Respondents