Madras High Court
Ponni vs Nirmala on 8 January, 2021
CRP.NPD.No. 1665 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.01.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
CRP.NPD.No. 1665 of 2016
1. Ponni
2. Gomathy
3. Shanmugasundaram
4. Ramanathan ... Petitioners
Vs.
Nirmala ... Respondent
PRAYER: The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of Civil
Procedure Code praying to set aside the fair and decretal order dated
03.03.2015 in I.A.No.188 of 2014 in un-numbered A.S.No. of 2014, on the
file of the Principal District Court, Salem.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Subramanian
For Respondent : M/s.Indira for
Mr.N.Manokaran
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.NPD.No. 1665 of 2016
ORDER
This Criminal Revision Petition is arising out of fair and decretal
order in I.A.No.188 of 2014 in un-numbered A.S.No. of 2014, dated
03.03.2015 on the filed of the Principal District Court, Salem, thereby,
dismissing the petition filed for condoning the delay of 105 days in filing
the appeal suit.
2. The petitioners are the defendants in the suit filed by the
respondent herein for partition. The respondent claimed 1/5th share in the
suit schedule properties. The suit was decreed as prayed for. Aggrieved by
the same, the petitioners/defendants filed appeal suit with the delay of 105
days in filing the appeal. They filed an affidavit in support of the petition
for condoning the delay, in which they stated the reason that the first
petitioner suffered with jaundice and as such, she taken native treatment,
due to which the appeal could not be filed in time.
3. The respondent filed counter affidavit stating that the petitioners
already filed the suit in O.S.No.325 of 2007 for the relief of partition on the
file of the Additional Sub Judge II, Salem and the same was dismissed by
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.NPD.No. 1665 of 2016
the judgment and decree dated 02.06.2011. Aggrieved by the same they
were also prepared in appeal suit in O.S.No.94 of 2012 and the same was
also dismissed for default. Therefore, they wantonly failed to file the
present appeal in time. The appeal filed with the petition to condone delay
was only drag the proceedings and nothing else.
4. Considering the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, the Court
below dismissed the petition to condone the delay of 105 days on the
ground that the reasons stated by the petitioners are not satisfactory and
they failed to show sufficient cause for the delay. Further, it was recorded
that the petitioners 2 to 4 also did not take any steps to file an appeal in
time. Though, the petitioners 2 to 4 did not file any separate appeal in time
they filed the appeal suit along with the first petitioner. The first petitioner
suffered with Jaundice and she had taken native treatment and as such, she
could not able to file the appeal suit in time. Therefore, the petitioners may
be given opportunity to file their appeal. It is also seen that even till today
the respondent did not file any petition for final decree.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.NPD.No. 1665 of 2016
5. In view of the above discussion, this civil revision petition is
allowed and the order passed in I.A.No.188 of 2014 in un-numbered
A.S.No. of 2014 dated 03.03.2015 is set aside. The Court below is directed
to number the appeal suit and dispose the same within a period of six
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and also fix a time.
08.01.2021
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
kv
To
The Principal District Court, Salem.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.NPD.No. 1665 of 2016
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.
kv
CRP.NPD.No. 1665 of 2016
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP.NPD.No. 1665 of 2016
08.01.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
