The importance of a valid and reasoned judgment in compliance with procedural requirements, considering the substantial rights of the parties and the hardship caused to the plaintiff due to the delay.

ORDER :

(Prayer : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 27.09.2021, passed in I.A.No.531 of 2017 in O.S.No.162 of 2011, by the Hon'ble Subordinate Judge, Arakkonam.)

This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 27.09.2021, passed in I.A.No.531 of 2017 in O.S.No.162 of 2011, by the learned Subordinate Judge, Arakkonam.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent and also perused the materials placed on record.

3. The petitioners are the legal heirs of the defendant in the suit in O.S.No.162 of 2011. The respondent/plaintiff filed a suit against the deceased defendant for specific performance. Since the deceased defendant remained exparte, the suit was decreed exparte on 06.03.2012. The decree was subsequently executed and the sale deed was also executed through the Court on 04.01.2018. The deceased defendant has filed a petition to set aside the exparte decree in I.A.No.532 of 2017, along with a petition in I.A.No.531 of 2017, to condone the delay of 2051 days. Both the petitions were dismissed by a common order of the learned Subordinate Judge dated 27.09.2021. Aggrieved over that, the petitioners have filed this Civil Revision Petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners came to know about the decree passed in the suit only when they got the notice in the execution proceedings and they could not immediately file a petition to set aside the exparte decree due to lack of material particulars. After verifying the original bundle through the learned counsel, the petitioners filed a petition to set aside the exparte order along with a petition to condone the delay.

5. At the time when the Civil Revision Petition was admitted, the learned counsel for the petitioners presented certain grounds before this Court. The first ground is that even when the petition was filed for condoning the delay in filing the petition to set aside the exparte order, the execution proceedings were pending, despite the judgment is not a speaking one. The second ground is that when the learned counsel reported no instructions, the Court ought to have issued notice to the parties.

6. In support of his above contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioners cited the following judgements:

1. R.Stella Vs. V.Antony Francis (2019 SCC Online Mad 24941).

2. Prabu Vs. Ramaiya and Others (C.R.P (NPD) No.3994 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.20197 of 2016 dated 26.03.2021).

(i) In the judgment of R.Stella Vs. V.Antony Francis (2019 SCC Online Mad 24941) the following observation has been made:

“19. It is clear from the above judgments that where the defendant contests a suit or submits himself to a decree, it is the bounden duty of the Trial Court to follow the procedure under Order XX Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Code, by giving the concise statement of the case, the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for such decision. If this is not satisfied and a cryptic unreasoned judgment is passed, it is ex-facie illegal. When a Court considers an application for delay to set aside the exparte decree, this must also be taken into consideration. If the original judgment itself is ex facie illegal, it cannot be allowed to continue and under such circumstances, it will have a bearing, while the Court considers an application to condone the delay to set aside the exparte decree. The Court need not have a pedantic approach in this regard, since it involves the substantial right of the parties.”

(ii) In the case of Prabu Vs. Ramaiya and Others (C.R.P (NPD) No.3994 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.20197 of 2016 dated 26.03.2021, it is held as under:

“10. The Order XX Rule 4 CPC would clearly state that the judgment of the Court shall contain a concise statement of the case, the points for determination, the decision there on and the reasons for such decision. Th