Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 877 (AP)

Thota Bharga Rekha v. Chirla Surreddy

2020-12-30

B.KRISHNA MOHAN

body2020
ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition arises against the Order in I.A.No.778 of 2019 in I.A.No.1361 of 2017 in O.S.No.529 of 2015 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam, dated 04.12.2019. 2. The petitioner herein is the petitioner in the I.A. No.778 of 2019 and the defendant in O.S.No.529 of 2015 before the Court below. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. 4. The petitioner herein filed an I.A. 778 of 2019 in I.A.1361 of 2017 in O.S.No.529 of 2015 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam seeking to restore the I.A.No.1361 of 2017 in O.S.No.529 of 2015 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam and the same was dismissed on 04.12.2019. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner herein came in Revision before this Court. 5. It is the case of the petitioner that I.A.No.1361 of 2017 in O.S.No.529 of 2015 was allowed by the Court below by setting aside the ex parte Order dated 22.12.2015 on payment of costs of Rs.1,000/-. But due to wrong noting of the date of hearing, the same could not be complied within time, but it was paid vide Memo dated 14.08.2019 before the Court below. Since it could not be properly represented before the Court below, the I.A., was dismissed observing that no sufficient reason was shown by the petitioner/defendant herein. After hearing the matter on the earlier occasion, this Court directed the petitioner herein to produce the said memo with proof of payment of costs, the same was produced before this Court. Since the reason assigned for non payment of costs within the time appears to be genuine, the parties cannot be put to suffer due to the mistake if any committed by the office of their counsel in payment of costs after the time limit as the Order in I.A.No.1361 of 2017 in O.S.No.529 of 2015 of the Court below was complied with the I.A.No.778 of 2019 for restoration of the I.A.No.1361 of 2017 in the suit shall be allowed to meet the ends of justice. 6. 6. Accordingly, the Order dated 04.12.2019 in I.A.No.778 of 2019 in I.A.No.1361 of 2017 in O.S.No.529 of 2015 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam is set aside, restoring the I.A.No.1361 of 2017 in O.S.No.529 of 2015 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam. 7. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed, directing both the parties to co-operate with the Court below to proceed with the matter as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law after restoration of the above said I.A.No.1361 of 2017 in the suit. No costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Civil Revision Petitions shall stand closed.