1. Animadverting upon the orders dated 13.6.2008 passed by the District Munsif, Sholinghur, in I.A.No.307 of 2007 and I.A.No.6 of 2008 in O.S.No.69 of 2001 and O.S.No.34 of 2002, respectively, these revision petitions have been filed.

2. A summation and summarisation of the germane facts in a few broad strokes can be encapsulated thus:

Ekambaram-the respondent in both the revisions filed the suit O.S.No.69 of 2001 for declaration of his title over an immovable property and for injunction as against Selvaraj-the revision petitioner herein in both the revisions. Subsequently, O.S.No.34 of 2002 was filed by the said Selvaraj in the same Court as against Ekambaram for declaration of his title and for recovery of possession.

(ii) It so happened that when O.S.No.69 of 2001 came up for trial, it was dismissed for default. However, the said O.S.No.34 of 2002 filed by Selvaraj was decreed ex-parte even as early as on 19.2.2003 due to non-appearance of the said Ekambaram as defendant in the suit.

(iii) I.A.No.307 of 2007 was filed in O.S.No.69 of 2001 to get the delay of 263 days condoned in filing the application under Order 9 Rule 9 to get the suit O.S.No.69 of 2001 restored.