[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
Pavunu vs Kannaiya Pillai on 13 March, 2026
CMP No. 17182 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13-03-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR
CMP No. 17182 and 17177 of 2023 in
SA.SR.Nos.138723 & 138724 of 2022
CMP No. 17182 of 2023 in
SA.Sr.No. 138723 of 2022
1. Pavunu
Rathinam (Since Deceased)
2. Prabavathy
3. Megavanan
4. Vatchaladevi
5. Chandramohan
..Petitioners(s)
Vs
Kannaiya Pillai
..Respondent(s)
Prayer in CMP No. 17182 of 2023 :- The civil miscellaneous petition is filed
under Section 41 Rule 3(A) of CPC, praying to condone the delay of 2057 days
in preferring this appeal.
Prayer in SA.Sr.No. 138723 of 2022 :- Second appeal is filed under Section
100 of Code of Civil Procedure, against the decree and judgment dated
16.12.2016 made in A.S.No.6 of 2013 on the file of learned Sub-Ordinate
Judge, Panruti confirming the decree and judgment dated 31.01.2013 made in
O.S.No.208 of 2002 on the file of learned District Munsif Court, Panruti.
For Petitioners(s): Mr.K.N.Nataraaj
__________
Page1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/03/2026 03:43:19 pm )
CMP No. 17182 of 2023
CMP No. 17177 of 2023 in
SA.Sr.No. 138724 of 2022
1. Pavunu
Rathinam (Since Deceased)
2. Prabavathy
3. Megavanan
4. Vatchaladevi
5. Chandramohan
..Petitioners(s)
Vs
1. Kannaiya Pillai
2.Parvathi Ammal
3. Sankar
4. Ravi
5. Gandhi
6. Arumugam Pillai
7. The Government of Tamil Nadu
represented by
District Collector, ...Respondents
South Arcot, Cuddalore
Prayer in CMP No. 17177 of 2023 :- The civil miscellaneous petition is filed
under Section 41 Rule 3(A) of CPC, praying to condone the delay of 2089 days
in preferring this appeal.
Prayer in SA.Sr.No. 138724 of 2022 :- Second appeal is filed under Section
100 of Code of Civil Procedure, against the decree and judgment dated
16.12.2016 made in A.S.No.7 of 2013 on the file of learned Sub-Ordinate
Judge, Panruti confirming the decree and judgment dated 31.01.2013 made in
O.S.No.201 of 2005 on the file of learned District Munsif Court, Panruti.
For Petitioners(s): Mr.K.N.Nataraaj
For Respondents Mr.B.Tamilnidhi
Additional Government Pleader for R7
__________
Page2 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/03/2026 03:43:19 pm )
CMP No. 17182 of 2023
COMMON ORDER
These civil miscellaneous petitions have been filed seeking to condone
the delay of 2057 and 2089 days respectively in filing the above second appeals.
2. It is seen from the typed set of papers that the first appellate court
disposed of the appeals on 16.12.2016 and the present second appeals have been
filed only on 08.12.2022 after delay of more than 2000 days. In the affidavit
filed in support of these condone delay petitions, it was stated by the appellants
that their predecessor in interest namely Rathinam died during the pendency of
appeals. The appellants 2 to 5 were brought on record as his legal
representatives.
3. It is seen from the records in SA.Sr.No.138723 of 2022 that the
certified copy of the common judgment and decree in A.S.No.6 of 2013 and
A.S.No.7 of 2013 have been applied by petitioners in time on 19.12.2016 and
the same have been furnished to the petitioners as early as 25.01.2017.
However, in the certified copy filed in other appeal in SA.Sr.No.138724 of
2022, the copy application for first appeal judgment and decree has been
applied only in the year 2022. When the petitioner is able to get the certified
copy of the judgment and decree passed in first appeal in one case in the year
2016 itself, I do not know what made the petitioners to wait for six years and
then, file copy application for the connected appeal. The petitioners in their
__________
Page3 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/03/2026 03:43:19 pm )
affidavit mentioned lack of knowledge and outbreak of Covid-19 as reasons for
condoning the long delay of 2000 and odd days.
4. It is settled law that ignorance of law is not an excuse. Further,
Covid-19 outbreak happened only during March 2020. The first appellate court
judgment was delivered in December 2016. In such circumstances, the
petitioners have not given any reason to explain the delay from December 2016
to March 2020. In such circumstances, the petitioners have not made out any
sufficient cause for condoning the inordinate delay of 2057 and 2089 days,
respectively. Accordingly, the civil miscellaneous petitions are dismissed. The
second appeals are rejected in SR stage itself. No costs.
13-03-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
nr
To
1. The Sub-Ordinate Judge, Panruti
2. The District Munsif Court, Panruti.
__________
Page4 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/03/2026 03:43:19 pm )
S.SOUNTHAR, J.
nr
CMP No. 17182 and 17177 of 2023 in
SA.SR.Nos.138723 & 138724 of 2022
13-03-2026
__________
Page5 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/03/2026 03:43:19 pm )
