THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2553 of 2010 25.6.2010 Between: M/s.Sri Coconuts, Bhimavaram, a registered firm represented by its Managing Partner, Maturi Vasudeva Gupta, S/o.Venkataratnam …Petitioner and M/s.Ome Jai Bhajarang Traders, represented by its Proprietor, J.Pandurangam, S/o.Hanumantu, Narayanakhed, Medak And others …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2553 of 2010 ORDER: Petitioner is plaintiff in O.S.No.69 of 2000 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Bhimavaram. The suit was filed for recovery of Rs.1,84,871/-. The same was decreed ex parte on 24.8.2002. The defendants – respondents herein; moved the Court by filing application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) to set aside the ex parte decree. By impugned order dated 30.11.2009 in I.A.No.365 of 2009, the Court below allowed the application accepting the contention of respondents that suit summons were not served on them. In this civil revision petition, the counsel for petitioner/plaintiff submits that when the ex parte decree was passed in 2002, application was filed in 2009, after lapse of seven years and, therefore, the impugned order suffers from grave error apparent on the face of record. He also submits that when plaintiff took out publications of summons in the Newspaper, it is sufficient compliance with law. After perusing the impugned order, this Court is not inclined to accept the plea of petitioner. After verifying the records, the Court below found that notices/summons were not served on the defendants and that even if publication was taken out, the defendants cannot be imputed with the knowledge of suit. The reasoning given and inference drawn by the Court below is sound exercise of discretion under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC and does not warrant any interference. The civil revision petition is therefore dismissed. ________________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) June 25, 2010. YS