THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR C.R.P. No.1486 of 2007 Date: 07.12.2010 Between: Dubagunta Srinivasa Rao … Petitioner AND M/s. Chalapathi Chit Fund Private Ltd. and 3 others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR C.R.P. No.1486 of 2007 ORDER: The revision petitioner is the first defendant in O.S.No.134 of 2002 on the file of the IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ongole. The suit was decreed ex parte. The first defendant subsequently preferred I.A.No.338 of 2004 to set aside the ex parte decree. The I.A.No.338 of 2004 was dismissed. The first defendant thereafter preferred C.M.A.No.21 of 2005 impugning the orders in I.A.No.338 of 2004. The learned Principal District Judge, Ongole dismissed C.M.A.No.21 of 2005. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision is filed. 2. The point for consideration is whether the ex parte order in O.S.No.134 of 2002 deserves to be set aside. 3. The learned counsel for the plaintiff/first respondent herein has pointed out that the plaintiff has recovered the entire decretal amount and that the decree has been duly satisfied. The revision petitioner is the first defendant. He was allegedly a member of the chit run by the plaintiff. After being a successful bidder, he did not honour his commitment. The plaintiff consequently laid the suit. As the revision petitioner and defendants 2 to 4 remain ex parte, O.S.No.134 of 2002 was decreed. 4. The revision petitioner seeks the indulgence to permit him to contest the case before the trial Court, on the ground that the entire decree had been satisfied and that the plaintiff would not suffer any inconvenience in the event the case is remanded to the trial Court for the first defendant to put forth his case before the trial Court. I consider that the revision deserves to be allowed and that the ex parte order against the revision petitioner/first defendant deserves to be set aside, where the entire decree was already satisfied. 5. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. I.A.No.338 of 2004 is also allowed. The ex parte order against the first defendant in O.S.No.134 of 2002 is set aside. In the event, the first defendant does not get ready within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the learned trial Judge is at liberty to dispose of the matter according to law. If the first defendant on the other hand appears before the trial Court within three months, the learned trial Judge shall dispose the suit on merits as expeditiously as possible and preferably within three months therefrom. No costs. ________________ K.G. SHANKAR, J Date: 07.12.2010 Isn