Madras High Court
Pandi vs Meenachiammal on 2 March, 2022
C.R.P(MD).No.2616 and 2617 of 2017
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 02.03.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S. ANANTHI
CRP(MD).No. 2616 and 2617 of 2017 and
CMP(MD).Nos.12046 and 12047 of 2017
Pandi .. petitioner in both CRPs
Vs.
1.Meenachiammal
2.Karuppaiye
3.Pandiammal .. Respondents in both CRPs
Common Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115
CPC against the fair and decreetal order dated 21.09.2017 in I.A.Nos. 124
and 122 of 2017 in O.S.No.569 of 2011 on the file of the III Additional
Subordinate Court, Camp at Usilampatti, Madurai.
For Petitioner in both CRPs ... Mr.B. Sekar
For respondents in both CRPs ... Mr. N. Vallinayagam,
Senior Counsel
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD).No.2616 and 2617 of 2017
COMMON ORDER
The revision petitioner / 1st defendant filed these revisions to
set aside the order passed in I.A.Nos. 124 and 122 of 2017 in O.S.No.569
of 2011 on the file of the III Additional Subordinate Court, Camp at
Usilampatti, Madurai.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and
perused the materials available on record.
3. The petitioner / 1st defendant has filed an application
I.A.No.122 of 2017 to condone the delay of 1446 days in filing an
application to set aside the ex parte pre decree passed in O.S.No.569 of
2011 on the file of the III Additional Subordinate Court, Camp at
Usilampatti, Madurai and the application in I.A.No.124 of 2017 filed to set
aside the final decree passed in the said suit.
3. The petitioner in both the applications filed these revisions
on the ground that his counsel entrusted the case and he has also believed
that his counsel filed written statement, but, only after inspection of the
Commissioner, the petitioner came to know the passing of pre-decree and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD).No.2616 and 2617 of 2017
final decree and hence, he has filed these revisions.
4. On perusal of the records it is seen that the delay is 1446
days and also not properly explained. But the suit is for partition the
respondents / plaintiffs admitted the defendant's share in the suit property.
Further, the petitioner contended that he purchased the property from the
co-sharer and already partition was effected. Since the share of the
petitioner is admitted by the plaintiff, the petitioner / 1st defendant is
necessary to decide the issue.
5. The counsel for the respondents / plaintiffs vigorously
argued and contended that the delay should not be condoned since there is
no proper reason. He has also relied on the Judgment of this Court
reported in 2020(1) CTC 377 (C. Ravi Vs. Sulochana and another),
wherein at para 19 it has been held as follows:
“19. Considering the facts and circumstances, the
petitioner has not made out a ground to condone the
enormous delay of 668 days, as the reasons furnished are
neither cogent nor convincing. The petitioner could not
establish that the huge delay occurred on account of certain
genuine reasons. In the absence of any bona fide or proof,
the Court cannot exercise its discretional powers so as to
condone the enormous delay of 668 days.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD).No.2616 and 2617 of 2017
He would further submit that since the share of the parties to be decided in
the partition suit one opportunity to be given to the petitioner. But, the
huge delay may be condoned with cost.
6. Considering that fact that this is a partition suit and that the
share of the parties to be decided in the suit, this Court is inclined to allow
these revisions with a cost of Rs.15,000/- to the respondent.
7. Accordingly, these Civil Revision Petitions are allowed and
the order passed in I.A.Nos. 124 and 122 of 2017 in O.S.No.569 of 2011
on the file of the III Additional Subordinate Court, Camp at Usilampatti,
Madurai are set aside. The petitioner is directed to pay a sum of
Rs.15,000/- to the respondents / plaintiffs on or before 21.03.2022, failing
which these Civil Revision Petitions shall stand dismissed automatically.
No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
02.03.2022
trp
Index :yes/No
Internet:yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD).No.2616 and 2617 of 2017
To
III Additional Subordinate Court, Camp at Usilampatti, Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD).No.2616 and 2617 of 2017
S. ANANTHI, J.,
trp
CRP(MD).No. 2616 and 2617 of 2017 and
CMP(MD).Nos.12046 and 12047 of 2017
02.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
