THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3097 of 2010 Date:23.07.2010 Between: T. Pattabhi Rami Reddy. ..... Petitioner AND Valla Narasimha Reddy. .....Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri P. Veera Reddy, Sri K. Murali Krishna Counsel for Respondent: -- The Court made the following: ORDER: This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 18.02.2010 passed in I.A.No.72 of 2007 in C.F.R.No.842 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda. The petitioner is the judgment debtor in O.S.No.165 of 1995 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Allagadda. Against the judgment and decree dated 12.04.2000 passed in the said suit, the petitioner filed an appeal in the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda, on 03.06.2000 with deficit Court fee. Along with the said appeal, he filed an application under Section 149 C.P.C. seeking enlargement of time for payment of deficit Court fee. An order was passed on the said application by the Court below granting time till 22.06.2000 for payment of deficit Court fee. The petitioner failed to comply with the said order and as a result, he did not pay the deficit Court fee for a period of seven years. In the year 2007, he has come up with I.A.No.72 of 2007 to extend the time by condoning the delay in representing the appeal. This application having been dismissed, the petitioner filed the present revision petition. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the record. In the order under revision, the Court below has taken into consideration the relevant facts and held that the explanation offered by the petitioner for nonpayment of the deficit Court fee is not acceptable. The Court below has appreciated the evidence of the petitioner given as P.W.1 and held that his cross examination revealed that his Advocate is stated to have promised to pay the requisite Court fee and that the petitioner consulted his Advocate about four years back and discussed the issue relating to the appeal. The Court below has further held and in my view rightly that the petitioner has failed to explain the reasons for his failure to consult his Advocate for three years thereafter. The Court below also held that the amount of Court fee being too low being less than Rs.1,000/-, there is no justification for the petitioner to plead poverty for nonpayment of such a low amount for a period of seven years. Further, the Court below has taken into consideration, the fact that his plea of illness is not supported by any evidence. On a careful consideration of the reasons given by the lower Court, I do not find any error in the order passed by it in refusing to condone the enormous delay of seven years in paying deficit Court fee. This Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the C.R.P., C.R.P.M.P.No.4116 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is also dismissed as infructuous. ___________________________ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 23rd July, 2010 GHN