Uppala Koteswaramma vs Mullapudi Venkata Naga Basavaiah
2024 Latest Caselaw 7651 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Uppala Koteswaramma vs Mullapudi Venkata Naga Basavaiah on 23 August, 2024

APHC010613432014
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
                               PRADESH
                                                       [3460]
                            AT AMARAVATI
                     (Special Original Jurisdiction)

        FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF AUGUST
            TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
                           PRESENT
     THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
             CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1505/2014
Between:
Uppala Koteswaramma                             ...PETITIONER
                              AND
Mullapudi Venkata Naga Basavaiah              ...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Petitioner:
   1. V S R ANJANEYALU
Counsel for the Respondent:
   1. G VAASUDEEVUDU
    2. G VAASUDEVUDU
The Court made the following:
                                   2




          HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
                     C.R.P.No.1505 of 2014
O R D E R:

This revision is filed questioning the order dated 02.04.2014 in I.A.No.312 of 2013 in O.S.No.143 of 2012 passed by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Avanigadda, Krishna District.

2. Petitioner is the defendant. Suit was filed by the respondent/plaintiff. Petitioner got filed a written statement and thereafter suit was decreed ex parte. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application to condone the delay of 8 days in filing the set aside default order. The said application was opposed and trial Court passed an elaborate order specifying the reasons for dismissing the application though the delay is very short. Hence, the present revision is filed.

3. Heard Sri V.S.R.Anjaneyulu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G.Vasudevudu, learned counsel for the respondent.

4. As seen from the order of the trial Court, the petitioner/defendant filed her chief affidavit and did not turn up for cross-examination and after granting number of adjournments, the Court imposed costs of Rs.50/- and posted the matter to 07.03.2013 with a condition that the defendant has to be present for cross-examination or else the evidence of the petitioner would be eschewed. On that day, the petitioner filed an application for adjournment and the matter was posted

to 11.03.2013 on costs of Rs.50/- and from time to time the case was adjourned. As the defendant was absent, the case was posted to 20.03.2013 on costs of Rs.200/-. Even on that day also, the defendant was absent and costs were also not paid. The trial Court treated the cross of D.W.1 as 'Nil' and posted the matter to 22.03.2013. On 22.03.2013 the matter was heard and judgment was pronounced on 23.03.2013.

5. The narration of facts show that the petitioner was given sufficient opportunity and there was no specific reason pointed out in the pleadings as to why she could not contest the case. Though the delay is short delay of 8 days, considering that the suit is based on a pro-note and decreed for a sum of Rs.71,880/-, it would be unfair for the respondent/plaintiff to again go through the rigor of trial in a suit filed in 2012 at this length of time for no fault on his side. This Court is not inclined to condone the delay of the petitioner, who had adopted a dilatory tactics as apparent from the suit proceedings.

6. The Civil Revision Petition is therefore dismissed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY,J Date: 23.08.2024 KLP