Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
The District Collector vs The Sri Ram Shg on 12 November, 2024
APHC010569282022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3460]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY ,THE TWELFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2172/2022
Between:
The District Collector and Others ...PETITIONER(S)
AND
The Sri Ram SHG ...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. GP FOR ARBITRATION (AP)
Counsel for the Respondent:
1. K SUBRAHMANYAM
The Court made the following:
2
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
Civil Revision Petition No.2172 of 2022
ORDER:
1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed aggrieved by the Order dated
28.04.2022 in I.A.No.201 of 2021 in O.S.No.134 of 2016 passed by the
Senior Civil Judge, Narsipatnam.
2. The Petitioners are the Defendants. A suit was filed by the respondent
for recovery of Rs.3,17,241/- on the basis of an agreement dated
01.03.2014 with subsequent interest and costs. As the
Petitioners/defendants herein did not contest the suit and did not file any
Written Statement even after imposing costs, they remained ex parte. The
trial Court after recording the evidence of the Plaintiff and the documents
marked at his instance decreed the suit vide Decree and Judgment dated
20.09.2017. Subsequently, the Plaintiff filed E.P.No.134 of 2016 for
realization of the decretal amount. At that stage, the petitioners filed the
present application to condone delay of 1745 days in filing a petition to set
aside the ex parte decree dated 20.09.2019. The said application was
opposed by the Plaintiff. The trial Court after hearing the respective
counsel dismissed the said application. Hence, the present Civil Revision
Petition.
3. Heard Sri Kata Sambasiva Rao, learned Assistant Government
Pleader appearing for the Petitioners and Sri K. Subrahmanyam, learned
counsel for the Respondent.
4. The explanation given by the petitioners was that the suit file was
misplaced and due to Covid, they could not contact their Advocate and
consequently, ex parte decree was passed. The explanation given by the
Petitioners is extracted below:
" I submit that the respondent/plaintiff filed the above suit for
recovery of suit amount. The written statement filed along with it. I
submit that the above suit is posted to on 18.09.2017 for filing of
our written statement. Due to non sanction of leave and
subsequently the suit file is misplaced and after that due to Covid-
19, we could not contact our Advocate and our written statement
not filed due meeting in Head Quarters, consequently, were set ex
parte. Subsequently, the above suit is decreed in favour of the
Plaintiff on 20.09.2017, as such, the delay is occurred in filing of
decree set a side petition along with our statement".
5. The above explanation of the Petitioners is vague, as no day to day
delay details are provided in the affidavit. It is not the case of the
Petitioners that they were not aware of the ex parte decree and the
requirement of filing the Written Statement. As there is no plausible
explanation given by the Petitioners, this Court is not inclined to interfere
with the Order passed by the trial Court.
6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to
costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous Petition, if any, pending shall stand
closed.
__________________
NYAPATHY VIJAY, J
Date: 12.11.2024
eha
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
CRP NO.2172 of 2022
Dt.12.11.2024
eha
U
