HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI B. PRAKASH RAO C.R.P.No. 1328 of 2007 Date: 18-11-2010 Between Smt. G. Shobha ………… Petitioner And Smt. lalithamma …… Respondent HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI B. PRAKASH RAO C.R.P.No. 1328 of 2007 ORDER: This Revision Petition is filed, under Section 115 of C.P.C., inter alia seeking to assail the order, dated 29-01-2007 passed in I.A.No.3238 of 2006 in I.A.No.3344 of 2005 in A.S.No.379 of 2005 on the file of the II Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, dismissing the Application filed under Order 41 Rule 19 of C.P.C. seeking to set aside the order and restore the Application, which was filed for restoration of the Appeal. Heard both sides. The facts are that subsequent to the decree in a suit for specific performance, the petitioner preferred an Appeal and when the same has come up for payment of batta, no batta was filed and therefore, the Appeal was dismissed. The petitioner filed I.A.No.3344 of 2005 seeking restoration of the Appeal. Though the application was adjourned for several times, the petitioner was not present and therefore, the application was dismissed. Again, the petitioner filed I.A.No.3238 of 2006 to set aside the order in I.A.No.3344 of 2005 and to restore the same on the ground that the matter was called during the call work and by the time he came to the Court, it was already dismissed during the call work itself, which is not correct and therefore, he seeks restoration of the Application. The Court below did not find favour with the reasons stated by the petitioner and dismissed the Application. Hence, the present Revision. Having heard the learned counsel on either side and also on perusal of the material, it is seen that the main appeal is pending involving substantial rights of the parties. Normally an opportunity should be given to the parties to have a final order on merits, after contest, other than allowing any one side order. The appeal at the threshold during the call work itself was dismissed. In view of the same, it is desirable that an opportunity should be given to the petitioner to contest the Appeal and to have Appeal disposed on merits. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. The orders, dated 10-07-2006 and 20-01-2007 in I.A.Nos.3344 of 2005 and 3238 of 2006 respectively are set aside. Consequently, I.A.Nos.3344 of 2005 and 3238 of 2006 are allowed and A.S.No.379 of 2005 is restored. The lower Court is directed to dispose of the main appeal on merits, after giving notice to both parties, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. ____________________ B. PRAKASH RAO, HACJ Date: 18-11-2010 YCR/IVD