THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR C.R.P.No.762 of 2010 O R D E R: Heard. This revision is directed against the order dated 02.11.2009 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, (FTC) Kothagudem in I.A.No.73 of 2008 in O.S.No.37 of 2004. The petitioners 1 and 2 herein are the defendants 1 and 2 in the original suit filed by the 1st respondent herein. The suit was filed basing on a chit agreement said to have been executed by the 1st petitioner herein who in her written statement categorically stated that she did not join the alleged chit transaction of the plaintiff Chit Fund Company. However, when the suit was posted for the cross-examination of the plaintiff, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners and therefore, the petitioners were set ex parte on 10.12.2007. The plaintiffs’ side evidence was closed on 10.12.2007 and ex parte decree was passed on 17.12.2007. The petitioners’ case is that the 1st petitioner was suffering from ill-health and she fell sick in Chatishghad and she was continuously under treatment for more than six months and subsequently she returned to warangal wherein she had taken a treatment from Dr.Chandra Sekhar. The lower Court considering the earlier docket orders of the Court and holding that she was previously set ex parte and that affidavit of PW.1 was filed on 17.07.2006 and from that day onwards the matter underwent several adjournments and that nothing prevented the 2nd petitioner to proceed with the matter, dismissed the application. When a specific plea was taken that the 1st petitioner was suffering from Jaundice and had taken treatment at Chatishghad and subsequently from a doctor at Warangal, the lower Court should have considered her request to condone the delay. However, having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that there are some laches on the part of the petitioners are also. It is always better if the matter is disposed of on merits. In the circumstances, on condition of petitioners paying an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards costs to the plaintiff within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the impugned order is set aside and the lower Court is directed to post the matter for the cross-examination of PW.1 and on that day, the petitioners shall cross examine PW.1 without taking any adjournment. Subject to this condition, the revision is allowed. No costs. ______________________ B.CHANDRA KUMAR,J 31st March, 2011. PNV