Madras High Court
Unknown vs Angammal on 2 August, 2021
Author: A.D.Jagadish Chandira
Bench: A.D.Jagadish Chandira
CRP (MD) No. 1620 of 2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED :02.08.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
C.R.P.(MD) No.1620 of 2014
and
M.P(MD) No. 2 of 2014
Mathiambalam (Died)
1. Chellammal
2.Pitchan Ambalam
3. Alagammal
4. Agathiyan
5.Azhagan
6.Karuppiah
7.Periyakka
8.Chinnamma
(cause title accepted vide order dated 03.07.2014
made in MP(MD) No.01 of 2014 in CRP(MD)
SR.No.14559 of 2014) ... Petitioner
-vs-
1. Angammal
2.Velliayammal
3.Azhagammal
4.Chinnammal ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP (MD) No. 1620 of 2014
of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order made in I.A.No.419 of 2013 in
O.S.No.35 of 2012 on the file of the learned II Additional District Judge, Trichy
dated 26.09.2013 by allowing this revision.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Sundar
For Respondents : Mr.Raguvaran
ORDER
This petition has been filed to set aside the fair and decreetal order made in I.A.No.419 of 2013 in O.S.No.35 of 2012 on the file of the learned II Additional District Judge, Trichy dated 26.09.2013.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners 1 & 3 to 8 are the legal heirs of one Mathiambalam and the second petitioner is the husband of the first petitioner and the fourth defendant has filed a suit O.S.No.35 of 2012 on the file of the learned II Additional District Judge, Trichy for partition and separate possession. The petitioner being husband of the second petitioner and the close relative of the other petitioners had been 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CRP (MD) No. 1620 of 2014 following the case on behalf of other petitioners. While so, due to his age the petitioner was suffering from blood pressure and other ailments and thereby he was not able to contact his advocate periodically and instruct him properly and thereby an exparte preliminary decree was passed against the petitioners on 12.09.2012. Whileso, the plaintiff had also filed a petition to take steps for passing of final decree. Coming to know the fact that the defendants were set ex parte, the petitioners had a filed a petition to set aside the exparte, however there had been a delay of 183 days in filing the petition and therefore I.A. No. 419 of 2017 was filed to condone the delay of 183 days to set aside the exparte order. The trial Court, without taking into consideration that the petitioner had shown sufficient cause, had dismissed the petition. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the substantial interest of the petitioners are involved in the partition suit and the delay is also not huge and that he would pray that the revision may be allowed on fixation of terms and imposition costs.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the trial Court had rightly found that the delay is not properly explained and hence dismissed the petition. However, he would submit that in the event of petition being 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CRP (MD) No. 1620 of 2014 allowed, it may be allowed on terms and costs. He would also submit that the petitioners have not filed written statements and they may be directed to file the same before the trial Court within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. He would also submit that the suit is of the year 2012 and hence a direction may be issued to the trial Court, to complete the trial at the earliest.
4.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either sides and perused the materials on record.
5. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petition may be allowed on terms and conditions. The petitioners are directed to pay a sum of Rs.1000/-(Rupees One thousand only) towards costs to the counsel for the respondent/ plaintiff within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6.In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed and the order passed in I.A.No.419 of 2013 in O.S.No.35 of 2012 on the file of the learned II 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CRP (MD) No. 1620 of 2014 Additional District Judge, Trichy is set aside and the delay is condoned. The trial Court is directed to take up the suit and complete the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably with in period of twelve months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. consequently connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.
02.08.2021
Internet : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
aav
To:
The II Additional District Judge, Trichy
5/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP (MD) No. 1620 of 2014
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
aav
C.R.P.(MD) No.1620 of 2014
and
M.P(MD) No. 2 of 2014
02.08.2021
6/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/