SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Mad) 787

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
Gomathi – Appellant
Versus
Natarajan – Respondent


Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :S. Senthilnathan, Advocate.
For the Respondents:K. Sankar, M.B. Raghavan, Advocates.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the order dated 06.04.2018 made in I.A.No.217 of 2017 in MACTOP No.246 of 2012 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Vridhachalam.(III Additional Districit and Sessions Judge), Cuddalore at Vridhachalam.)

1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed in I.A.No.217 of 2017 in MACTOP No.246 of 2012 dated 06.04.2018 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Vridhachalam (III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Cuddalore at Vridhachalam).

2. Since the Revision Petitioner remained absent, an ex-parte decree was passed on 12.04.2016 in M.C.O.P.No.246 of 2012. Thereafter, the revision petitioner filed an application in I.A.No.217 of 2017 to condone the delay of 220 days in filing the petition to set aside the ex-parte decree.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that originally the petitioner was set ex-parte by virtue of the order of the Court below on 23.01.2013. In the affidavit, filed in support of the petition, the revision petitioner has stated that she was suffering from Jaundice and as per Doctor's advise, she took bed rest and hence

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top