PILLALA CHENNAKESAVULU Vs. PILLALA REDDIKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed against Order, dated 15-09-2011, in IA.No.93 of 2011 in OS.No.18 of 2007, on the file of the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri.

(2.) I have heard Mr.K.Venkat Rao, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr.C.Sumon, learned Counsel for the respondents.

(3.) The respondents have filed the abovementioned suit for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property. The petitioner herein is defendant No.2, his father is defendant No.1 and his mother is defendant No.3 in the said suit. As the defendants did not file written statement, they were set ex parte. IA.No.315 of 2009 was filed on behalf of all the defendants including the petitioner herein for setting aside the ex parte order. The said IA was allowed by the lower Court permitting all the defendants to file a written statement. The parents of the petitioner i.e., defendants 1 and 3 have filed separate written statements in December, 2007. However, no written statement was filed by the petitioner. On 22-10-2010, issues were framed and the case was posted to 22-11-2010 for trial. After filing the affidavits in lieu of chief-examination by the plaintiff witnesses, when the case was coming up for cross-examination of PW.1, the petitioner filed IA.No.93 of 2011 for permission to file written statement. This application was dismissed by the lower Court by the Order under revision.