HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. No.4470 of 2009 Dated 29-3-2010 Between: K.Gangadhar Goud and others. …Petitioners. And: Sub Post Master, Phulong, Post Office, Nizamabad-A.P. and others. …Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. No.4470 of 2009 ORDER: The C.R.P. is directed against the order of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Nizamabad dated 28-4-2009 dismissing the application in I.A.No.284 of 2008 in O.P.No.5 of 2004. 2. The petitioners herein who are the applicants in O.P.No.5 of 2004 had filed the said O.P. seeking Succession Certificate. 3. The said O.P. was dismissed for default as the counsel for the petitioners before the Court below did not attend the Court on 24.3.2005. The petitioners have filed the present application seeking condonation of 1172 days together with application to restore O.P. The said application for condonation has been dismissed before the Court below. Hence, this Revision Petition. 4. This Court issued notice before admission on 18-9-2009 and though the notice was served, no body appeared. By a further order dated 26-10-2009, the C.R.P. was admitted and directed to be listed for final disposal after one week. On 25.2.2010 while hearing the C.R.P. this Court ordered fresh notice to the respondents 1 and 2 and the petitioner’s counsel was permitted to take out notice and file proof of service. Accordingly, the learned counsel has filed a memo in U.S.R.No.340 of 2010 dated 15.3.2010 together with acknowledgement that notice has been served on the respondents 1 and 2 with their endorsement on the personal notice. 5. The revision Petition was heard on 18-3-2010 and 22.3.2010. But today also, there was no representation on behalf of the respondents. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. 7. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has now filed an additional affidavit stating that when the O.P. was posted for evidence on 24-3-2005, their counsel did not appear for hearing and did not also inform the petitioners though the petitioners stated that they were regularly in touch with the counsel. It is also stated that whenever the petitioners visited his office, counsel used to inform that O.P. is pending and ultimately when the petitioners demanded to give date of haring, bundle was traced out by the counsel and it was noticed that O.P. was dismissed for default. Thereafter, the petitioner engaged another counsel and filed the present application. The affidavit filed in support of the petition before the Court below was no doubt very cryptic but the additional affidavit is now filed and in the circumstances, though the O.P. was merely in the nature of succession O.P. and that the respondents have not appeared before this Court in spite of service of notice, in the interest of justice, I feel it appropriate to give an opportunity to the petitioners, so that succession O.P. can be disposed of on merits. The sufficient cause as is appeared in the affidavit of the petitioners as well as additional affidavit of the petitioner coupled with the fact that no counter-affidavit was filed opposing the same, either before the Court below or before this Court, the C.R.P. is allowed, consequently, application in I.A.No.284 of 2008 in O.S.No.5 of 2004 is allowed and the O.P.No.5 of 2004 shall stand restored on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Nizamabad. The petitioner shall report ready on the next date of hearing before the trial Court and shall lead evidence if they so choose and the trial Court shall consider and dispose of O.P. on merits within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that the petitioners shall cooperate with the Court below and shall not seek adjournments in view of the disposal of the O.P. within one month as directed. 9. Accordingly, C.R.P. is allowed. No costs. _____________________________________ Justice VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR Dated 29-3-2010. Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. No.4470 of 2009 Dated 29-3-2010