THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5772 of 2010 Dated:24.12.2010 Between: S.Chandrasekharan, And another. ...Petitioners And Y.Sivaiah. ...Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5772 of 2010 ORDER: The suit for recovery of money filed by the respondent (plaintiff) based on a promissory note was decreed ex parte. The petitioners filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, along with I.A.No.165 of 2007 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, seeking condonation of delay of 1318 days in filing the said application. By impugned order, dated 14.12.2009, the Court of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tirupati, dismissed the application observing that the petitioners/defendants failed to show sufficient cause for condoning such huge extraordinary delay. The order is put in challenge in this Civil Revision Petition. It is well settled that when the Court below failed to exercise its discretion in condoning the delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the revisional Court has to independently consider the matter (see N.Balakrishnan v M.Krishnamurthy[1]). Applying this test, this Court has examined without any reference to the order passed by the Court below. In the affidavit accompanying their application, being I.A.No.165 of 2007, it is alleged that the Counsel engaged by the petitioners was held up in the other Court on 11.10.2007, that he entrusted his matter to his colleague, that by mistake and oversight the matter was not represented, and that the suit was decreed ex parte. Applying even liberal standards this Court is not able to countenance the submission that there are sufficient reasons shown for condonation of delay. The affidavit in support of the application was filed in a casual manner without explaining the delay of 1318 days. In that view of the matter, this Court does not find any grave error apparent on the face of the record. The Civil Revision Petition is, therefore, dismissed. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 24.12.2010 vs [1] AIR 1998 SC 3222