LAVURI KRISHNA Vs. BUDIGE HUSSAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri M.S.Prasad, learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner and Sri Kiran Palakurthi, learned Counsel representing the first respondent/plaintiff.

(2.) The civil revision petition is filed as against an order made in I.A.No.1009 of 2005 in O.S.No.20 of 1998 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Nalgonda, dated 27-9-2005. The revision petitioner-7th defendant in the suit O.S. No.20 of 1998 filed I.A.No.1009 of 2005 under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1973 for condonation of delay of one day in setting aside the ex parte decree. The said application was filed on the ground that there is a delay of only one day in filing an application to set aside the ex parte decree inasmuch as the period to be computed from the date of knowledge. The same was resisted by filing a counter in detail. The learned Judge on appreciation of the rival stand taken by the parties arrived at a conclusion that the petitioner had not approached the Court with Clean hands and with a view to delay the process of execution, this application was thought of and ultimately, dismissed the same with costs. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision petition is filed.

(3.) Contentions of Sri M.S. Prasad : Sri M.S. Prasad, learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner had taken this Court through the endorsement made by the Process Server and the contents thereof and also the certified copy of the judgment, which was made in this regard. The learned Counsel would contend that inasmuch as the endorsement made by the Process Server can taken to be an official act, which can be presumed to have been done in accordance with law, it can be taken that there was no service of notice and hence, in the absence of service of notice, from the date of knowledge, the period to be calculated and hence, there is a delay of one day and accordingly, the application was filed to condone the delay of one day.