THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM C.R.P.No. 2103 of 2008 Dated: 18-03-2011 Between: Srirangam Satyanarayana ….Petitioner And Akula Lakshmi @ Latchayamma and others. ….Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM C.R.P.No. 2103 of 2008 Dated: 18-03-2011 Oral order: This revision is directed against the order dated 15-12-2006 rejecting I.A.No. 290 of 2006 in O.S.No. 164 of 2004 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Pithapuram. The learned Junior Civil Judge, Pithapuram dismissed the petitioner’s/plaintiff’s application filed under Order IX Rule 9 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘the CPC’) seeking rescinding of the order dated 28-02-2006 of the Court below, dismissing the suit for default. The suit is a money suit of the year 2004. In the affidavit accompanying I.A.No. 290 of 2006, the petitioner/plaintiff pleaded that he failed to pay process fee for service of the suit summons on defendants since they were requesting him for compromise day after day and that as the suit was dismissed for non- payment of the process fee, the suit may be restored. The Court below recorded the following reasons for rejecting the application: During enquiry the learned counsel for respondents filed the certified copies of the petitioners advocate clerks in 151 CPC petition, on perusing it, it was clearly mentioned due to non-availability addresses of the respondents within time process was not filed. Now in this petition affidavit it is stated that respondents approaching them for compromise. Hence, I did not seen any cogent reasons given by the petitioners. On perusing the suit docket from 13-10-2004 to 28-02- 2006, several adjournments were granted under Section 151 CPC by condoning the delay in filing of process. The suit is of 2004 and in spite of several chances, plaintiff not taken any steps for service of summons as ordered by the court. Hence I do not find any valid grounds to set aside the default order, the petition is devoid of merits. This Court discerns no error in the application of law or exercise of discretion by the Court below in rejecting the application to set aside the default order having regard to the gross negligence and apathetic attitude of the petitioner/plaintiff in pursuing the money suit of the year 2004. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. No costs. __________________________ JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM Dated: 18-03-2011 Pvks/*