Madras High Court
M.Jeevagan vs Aiyaavu Nadar (Died) on 25 August, 2025
Author: P.Velmurugan
Bench: P.Velmurugan
C.M.P.No.15660 of 2025
and
C.R.P.Sr.No.90254 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 25.08.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
C.M.P.No.15660 of 2025
and
C.R.P.Sr.No.90254 of 2025
M.Jeevagan ... Petitioner
..vs..
Aiyaavu Nadar (Died)
1. Selvam
2. Mani
3. Setu ... Respondents
C.M.P.No.15660 of 2025 filed under Section 5 of the Limitation
Act to condone the delay of 236 days in filing the above Civil Revision
Petition before this Court against the fair and decretal order dated
28.03.2024 in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in O.S.No.75 of 2004 on the file of the
District Munsif Court, Uthangarai, Krishnagiri District.
Page No.1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2025 04:09:24 pm )
C.M.P.No.15660 of 2025
and
C.R.P.Sr.No.90254 of 2025
Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 CPC to set aside
the fair and decretal order dated 28.03.2024 in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in
O.S.No.75 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Uthangarai,
Krishnagiri District.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Thiruvengadam
For Respondents : Mr.J.Pradeep
for R1 to R3
ORDER
This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to condone the delay of 236 days in filing the above Civil Revision Petition before this Court against the fair and decretal order dated 28.03.2024 made in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in O.S.No.75 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Uthangarai, Krishnagiri District.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3 and perused the materials available on record.
Page No.2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2025 04:09:24 pm ) C.M.P.No.15660 of 2025 and C.R.P.Sr.No.90254 of 2025
3. The petitioner is the plaintiff, who filed the suit in O.S.No.75 of 2004 for declaration of title and for consequential injunction, which was dismissed for default on 31.08.2007. Hence, the petitioner filed an application in I.A.No.01 of 2022 seeking to condone the delay of 5287 days to re-present the application under Order IX Rule 9 of CPC for setting aside the order of dismissal of suit dated 31.08.2007 and the same was dismissed on 28.03.2024. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred the present revision petition along with the petition seeking to condone the delay of 236 days in filing the above revision petition.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner/plaintiff was working in Army and that he was unable to contact his counsel during the suit proceedings and hence, the suit was dismissed for default. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application under Order IX Rule 9 of C.P.C., on the same day of dismissal of the suit, but the same was returned on the ground that notice was not given to the Page No.3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2025 04:09:24 pm ) C.M.P.No.15660 of 2025 and C.R.P.Sr.No.90254 of 2025 other side. As the petitioner retired in the year 2018 and was undertaking works to procure the benefits of the retirement and also due to COVID- 19 pandemic situation, he has not re-presented the application in time and has filed the application in I.A.No.1 of 2022 with a delay of 5287 days in re-presenting the restoration application. Therefore, the delay is neither wilful nor wanton. However, the learned Judge, without considering the bona fide reasons for delay, mechanically dismissed the application on the ground of enormous delay.
5. In the affidavit filed by the revision petitioner in support of the application filed to condone the delay before the trial Court, he has stated that he was working in Army and also due to COVID-19 pandemic situation, he was not able to make his appearance before the Court below and was also not re-presented the restoration application in time.
6. It is seen that the suit is of the year 2004 and in the earlier occasions, the suit was dismissed and the same was restored and Page No.4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2025 04:09:24 pm ) C.M.P.No.15660 of 2025 and C.R.P.Sr.No.90254 of 2025 subsequently, the suit was dismissed for default in the year 2007. The petitioner has kept quiet for 14 years and all of a sudden, he came back and re-presented the petition with condone the huge delay of 5287 days by stating the above said reasons. When one of the main reason stated by the petitioner is that he was prevented to approach the Court due to COVID-19 pandemic situation, but the said reason is not acceptable. It is judicially noticed that COVID-19 itself came into the world in the year 2019 and the same continued for 600 days and above. However, the petitioner has not substantiated that during that time he never came to his native place. The petitioner himself is the plaintiff in O.S.No.75 of 2004 and therefore, he cannot say that he was not aware of the suit proceedings, even though he is in Army. Further, it is pertinent to state that for re-presenting the returned application the presence of the parties are not required and the petitioner has not given any valid and sufficient reasons to the satisfaction of the Court to condone the enormous delay, the Court below has rightly dismissed the application. Hence, it does not require any interference by this Court.
Page No.5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2025 04:09:24 pm ) C.M.P.No.15660 of 2025 and C.R.P.Sr.No.90254 of 2025
7. Further, it is seen that the petitioner has not filed the present revision petition immediately after passing of the impugned dismissal order and the same was filed with a delay of 236 days. The petitioner has not properly explained the reasons for the said delay to the satisfaction of this Court, except by bald allegations, and the conduct of the petitioner only shows his lethargic attitude and dilatory tactics to protract the proceedings.
8. Under the above circumstances, this Court does not find any reason for condoning the delay of 236 days in filing the revision petition Therefore, this Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. Consequently, Civil Revision Petition is dismissed at the S.R.stage itself. There shall be no order as to costs.
25.08.2025 Speaking Order : Yes/No Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No ms Page No.6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2025 04:09:24 pm ) C.M.P.No.15660 of 2025 and C.R.P.Sr.No.90254 of 2025 To
1. The District Munsif, Uthangarai, Krishnagiri District.
2.The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
Page No.7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2025 04:09:24 pm ) C.M.P.No.15660 of 2025 and C.R.P.Sr.No.90254 of 2025 P.VELMURUGAN, J.
ms C.M.P.No.15660 of 2025 and C.R.P.Sr.No.90254 of 2025 25.08.2025 Page No.8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/09/2025 04:09:24 pm )