Madras High Court
Rameshwara Lingam vs Thankappan Pillai on 8 February, 2021
C.M.P.(MD)No.915 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 08.02.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
C.M.P(MD)No.915 of 2021
in C.R.P.(MD)SR.No.53948 of 2020
Rameshwara Lingam ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.Thankappan pillai
2.Saraswathi Amma ... Respondents
Prayer in C.M.P(MD)No.915 of 2021: This petition is filed under
Section 5 of the Limitation Act, to condone the delay of 3264 days for
filing civil revision petition against the fair and decreetal order passed by
the Subordinate Judge, Padmanabhapuram in E.A.No.353 of 2011 in
E.P.No.68 of 2008 in O.S.No.79 of 2007, dated 18.10.2011.
Prayer in C.R.P.(MD)SR.No.53948 of 2020: This civil revision petition
filed under Section 115 of CPC., to call for the records relating to fair
and decreetal order passed by learned Subordinate Judge,
Padmanabhapuram in E.A.No.353 of 2011 in E.P.No.68 of 2008 in
O.S.No.79 of 2007, dated 18.10.2011 and set aside the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Balakrishnan
http://www.judis.nic.in
1/4
C.M.P.(MD)No.915 of 2021
ORDER
This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed to condone the
delay of 3264 days in filing the above civil revision petition.
2.As regards the delay, the learned counsel for the petitioner would
state that he is illiterate and he did not know about the order passed in
obstruction petition and when the appeal in A.S.No.14 of 2012 was taken
up for hearing, the Appellate Court raised the plea of non challenging of
the order passed in obstruction petition and thereafter only he came to
know about the same. Thus, he would pray to condone the delay.
3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the
materials available on record.
4.The petitioner has stated in a routine manner that he is illiterate
and senior citizen. Gross negligence on the part of the counsel or the
litigant has to be taken note of while considering the delay.
5.It is seen that no acceptable reason has been adduced for
condoning the huge delay of 3264 days in filing the above civil revision
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.P.(MD)No.915 of 2021
petition. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to condone the delay of
3264 days in filing the revision. By applying the principles laid down in
the Judgment reported in Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee
of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy & others, [2013 (5) CTC 547
(SC) : 2013 (5) LW 20], I am not inclined to condone the delay of 3264
days in filing the above revision.
6.Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. In view of the order
passed in CMP(MD)No.915 of 2021, the connected C.R.P(MD)SR. No.
53948 of 2020 is rejected at the SR stage itself. No costs.
08.02.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
gns
Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a
web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring
that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be
the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To
1. The Subordinate Court, Padmanabhapuram.
2.The Record Keeper,
Vernacular Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
http://www.judis.nic.in
C.M.P.(MD)No.915 of 2021
J.NISHA BANU,J
gns
C.M.P(MD)No.915 of 2021
in C.R.P.(MD).SR.No.53948 of 2020
08.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
