ORDER :

Heard Sri Ghantasala Udaya Bhaskar, learned counsel for the revision-petitioner. No representation for the respondent.

2. This revision-petition is directed against the Order, dated 03.07.2015 passed in I.A.No.53 of 2014 in O.P.No.236 of 2012 on the file of Judge, Family Court-cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vijayawada, filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (for brevity “the Act”) by the revision-petitioner to condone the delay of 125 days in filing the application under Order IX Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity “CPC”) to set-aside the ex parte decree, dated 03.07.2015.

3. Learned counsel for the revision-petitioner would submit that delay was occurred as the revision-petitioner was suffering from ill-health during the above said period, but the Trial Court erroneously “Dismissed” the application.

4. In the light of the above context of the revision petitioner/appellant, the point that arises for consideration is: -

“Whether the Trial Court committed any material irregularity in the impugned Order, dated 03.07.2015 passed in I.A.No.53 of 2014 in O.P.No.236 of 2012 on the file of Judge, Family Court-cum-IV Additional District and