THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY C.M.A.No.751 of 2010 JUDGMENT: The deceased-first appellant filed O.S.No.1425 of 2004 in the Court of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, against the respondent for the relief of declaration of title and recovery of possession of the suit schedule property. During the pendency of the suit, she died. Appellants 2 to 6 were brought on record as her legal representatives. The suit was coming up for carrying out the amendment in the cause title. At that stage, the trial Court dismissed the suit for default on 05.08.2009. The appellant filed I.A.No.874 of 2009 under Rule 9 of Order 13 C.P.C. with a prayer to set aside the order, dated 05.08.2009. The trial Court dismissed the I.A. through order, dated 03.08.2010. Hence, this C.M.A. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the respondent. It is no doubt true that there was some delay on the part of the appellant in carrying out the amendments in the plaint and the suit was adjourned on quite number of occasions. However, it should not be forgotten that respondents 2 to 6 were not conversant with the suit and they had to make their own arrangement. The trial Court was mostly impressed by the fact that the suit is of the year 2004 and no substantial progress has taken place in it. The appellants deserve to be given an opportunity to pursue the suit. Hence, the C.M.A. is allowed and the order under appeal is set aside. As a result, the suit is restored to file. The appellants shall carry out necessary amendments on the same day, on which the suit is listed by the trial Court and shall also commence their evidence and conclude the same within three months. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 20.06.2011 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY C.M.A.No.751 of 2010 Date: 20.06.2011 JSU