MANDUVA SRINIVASA RAO Vs. SAJANA GRANITES MADRAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is the first defendant in O.S. No. 158 of 1992 on the file of Additional .Subordinate Judge, Ongole. The suit was posted before the trial Court on 8-3-1995 for filing the written statement of the defendanls. At the time of hearing, Sri Veerabhadraiah, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the revision petitioner placed a memo extracting the order made by the trial Court on 8-3-1995. It reads as under :--

(2.) There afterwards, the present I.A. No. 573 of 1995 was filed by the first defendant under Order 9, Rule 7, C.P.C. praying the Court to set aside the order made on 8-3-1995 against him. This application was filed before the trial Court on 14-3-1995. In support of this application, the first defendant filed two affidavits. In the affidavit of the first defendant it is stated that the suit stood posted to 8-3-1995 and on that day the first defendant was not present in the Court-and his brother by name Mr. Vcnkat Rao also was not present. The first defendant proceeded to aver in the affidavit that the written statement was already prepared before 8-3-1995 and that was also signed by him. However, the written statement was kept in another big bundle. In para-5 of the affidavit, the first defendant has stated that when the suit was called on 8-3-1995, the Junior Counsel Sri K. Nageswara Rao, appeared and he made a request to the Court for grant of time. It is further averred that the Junior Counsel was under the impression that the time sought by him was g'ranled by the Court for filing the written statement and the case was adjourned to 6-6-1995. In addition to this affidavit, the affidavit of the Senior Counsel appearing for the first defendant in the suit is also filed. Sri K. Venkateswarlu. the Senior Counsel has also stated in the affidavit that, when the suit was called on 8-3-1995 the Junior Counsel appeared and made a request for grant of time and the Junior Counsel was under the impression that the time was granted for filing written statement and on the basis of information passed on by the Junior Counsel, the clerk made a docket entry "W.S.T.E. call on 6-6-95".

(3.) The learned trial Judge has rejected the application. Hence this revision.