Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J
D.V.Venkatesan – Appellant
Versus
N.R.Subramanian – Respondent
ORDER :
N.Sathish Kumar, J.
Challenging the order of the Trial Court dismissing the application filed to condone the delay of 1158 days in setting aside the exparte decree dated 07.03.2015, the present revision has been filed.
2. Brief background of the case is as follows:
2.a. The suit in O.S.No.42 of 2013 has been filed for relief of specific performance of agreement dated 10.05.2010. The said suit came to be decreed exparte on 07.03.2015. Therefore, the petitioners took up application to condone the delay of 1158 days in setting aside the exparte decree dated 07.03.2015. The reasons assigned by the revision petitioners before the Trial Court is that in the original suit, after receiving a notice in I.A.No.210 of 2013, they engaged lawyers namely Ms.Poorna Chandrika and Ms.Theresa. The petitioners were under bonafide belief that the above case has been pursued and taken care by their advocate. However, to their gross dismay, they came to know the fact of exparte decree only upon service of notice in E.P.No.35/2016. They came to know that the suit was decreed exparte on 07.03.2015, they have duly entered appearance in the said Execution Petition on 23.03.2016 immediately and undertook
The court held that mere reliance on counsel does not excuse delay in litigation; sufficient cause must be demonstrated for each day of delay to condone it.
The court held that sufficient cause must be shown to condone delay under the Limitation Act, and mere negligence of legal counsel does not qualify as such.
Failure to demonstrate sufficient cause for delay in setting aside an ex parte decree results in dismissal of the application, emphasizing diligence and valid service of summons.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for convincing and acceptable reasons for condonation of delay, emphasizing that the length of delay is not material, but the reasons stat....
The court emphasized that the discretion to condone delay in filing an appeal is not a matter of right and must be exercised judiciously, considering the merits of the case only when sufficient cause....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
