1. The point that arises for consideration is whether a Civil Revision can be treated as in defects and dismissed for not curing the defects simply for the reason that the petitioner does not pay communication bata for an order on an interlocutory application making a stay absolute and that too in the presence of the counsel for the respondents. The petitioner challenged the order of a Taluk Land Board in a ceiling case in the Civil Revision before this Court. Along with the revision, the petitioner filed an application for stay on which interim stay for 10 days and notice was ordered by the Court. The petitioner remitted process fee and the stay order was communicated to the respondents. Notice was served on the respondents and in the presence of the counsel for the respondents the stay was subsequently made absolute. The petitioner did not deposit communication bata for the order making the stay absolute and, for that reason, the revision was treated as defective and was posted for curing defects.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that as the stay order was made absolute in the presence of the counsel for the respondents, no communication of the order