BATHINA RAMANAIAH Vs. PULAVARTHI AMRUTHAVALLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appallant herein preferred an appeal in A S ND 51 of 1974 on the file of the Addl District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the trial court. When the appeal was called for hearing on 10-10-77 one Sri Vankateswara Rao appearing before the Court, on behalf of Sri A Subbarap who was the counsel for the appellant in that appeal, reported that the appellant does not press the appeal and he also made an endorsement to that effect on the mamorandum of appeal. In view of the representation and the endorsement made by him on the memorandum of appeal the appeal A S No. 51/74 was dismissed as not pressed on the same day i.e. on 10-10-1977.

(2.) Thereafter, neither the appel" lant nor his advocate Sri A Subba Rao has taken any steps for setting aside the order dt. 10-10-77 for a long tima and it is only on 2-9-1978 that is one year after the dismissal of the appeal, the appellant herein filed an application underOrder 47 Rule 1 and section 114 of CPC to review the order of dismissal of the appeal as not pressed dated 10-10-1977. It would appea' that along with the review a petition for condonation of delay was also filed and the court condoned the delay in filing the review petition. But at the final hearing of the review petition the learned District Judge by the impugned order dated 21-8-1980 dismissied the application for review of the order dt. 10-10-1977.

(3.) Aggrieved bythat order thisCivil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Order 43 Rule 1 (w) CPC.