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

2022 Supreme(Mad) 1579

S. SOUNTHAR
Mariyaselvam – Appellant
Versus
Hemasanthi – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:C. Munusamy, Advocate. For the Respondents: No Appearance.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code, praying to set aside the order dated 31.07.2013 made in I.A.No.76 of 2013 in O.S.No.60 of 2012, on the file of the Principal District Munsif-cum- Judicial Magistrate, Chengam by allowing this Civil Revision Petition.)

Aggrieved by the dismissal of a petition to condone the delay of 167 days in seeking to set aside the ex-parte decree, the defendant has come up with this revision.

2. Though the respondents are served and their names appear in the cause list. There is no representation for the respondents. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and perused papers.

3. The respondent herein filed a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession in O.S.No.60 of 2012, on the file of the Principal District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Chengam and an ex parte decree was passed on 16.07.2013. The revision petitioner filed a petition to set aside the ex parte decree along with written statement on 28.01.2013. Since there was a delay of 167 days, in seeking to set aside the ex parte decree, he also filed an application to condone the delay in I.A.No.76 of 2013.

4. In support of the petition to con

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