IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THIS THE 29th DAY OF JANUARY, 2010 C.R.P.No.4264 of 2009 Between: G.C.Krishna Reddy and another ….PETITIONER(S) and Gajjala Valeswara Reddy and others …RESPONDENT(S) THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4264 of 2009 ORDER: Petitioners herein filed O.S.No.205 of 2002 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Punganur, against the respondents seeking declaration of their right and title over the suit schedule property and also for grant of permanent injunction against the respondents. It is stated that pending suit there was an order of injunction in favour of the petitioners and the suit was dismissed on 19.07.2007. Against the said dismissal, the petitioners filed A.S.No.23 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Punganur and during pendency of the appeal, the petitioners filed I.A.No.277 of 2007 in A.S.No.23 of 2007 for grant of interim injunction against the respondents till disposal of the appeal. By order dated 21.04.2008, the said I.A. was dismissed. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners filed C.M.A., along with an application in I.A.No.442 of 2008 seeking to condone the delay of 58 days in filing the C.M.A., on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle. By order dated 13.04.2009, the learned II Additional District Judge has dismissed I.A.No.442 of 2008 in the unnumbered C.M.A. Hence, the present petition. Though notices have been served on all the respondents, there was no representation on their behalf. Heard the learned counsel for petitioners. I.A.No.442 of 2008, the order of which is challenged in this petition, is filed seeking to condone the delay in filing the C.M.A. In I.A.No.442 of 2008, the 1st petitioner filed an affidavit, on behalf of both the petitioners, stating that he is looking after the suit proceedings on behalf of the 2nd petitioner also and he, being a diabetic patient since many years, due to ill-health, could not file the appeal within time and in that process, the delay of 58 days in filing the C.M.A. took place. It is also stated that the 2nd petitioner is an illiterate and his mother died on 17.06.2008 and, therefore, he was also not able to approach the advocate within time to take necessary steps for filing the C.M.A. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the delay of 58 days is a meager one and the learned II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle, ought to have liberally considered the said application. Therefore, the delay of 58 days in filing the C.M.A. is condoned. Consequently, the order impugned stands set aside and the I.A.No.442 of 2008 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle, stands allowed. The Civil Revision Petition is, accordingly, allowed. No order as to costs. __________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J 29th January 2010 CVRK