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

2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 1027

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Hon`ble Mr.Justice K.MURALI SHANKAR
P. MURUGESAN – Appellant
Versus
M. NAINAR MOHAMMED – Respondent


ORDER

The Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order passed in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in A.S.No...... of 2020, dated 03.03.2021, on the file of the Principal District Court, Theni, dismissing the petition filed under Order 41 Rule 3(A) C.P.C., to condone the delay of 2765 days in filing the appeal.

2. The respondent as plaintiff has filed a suit in O.S.No.157 of

2002, on the file of the Subordinate Court, Periyakulam claiming the relief of specific performance of the sale agreement dated 23.05.2000. Since the revision petitioner/defendant has remained exparte, an exparte judgment and decree came to be passed on 21.06.2002. The plaintiff has then laid an execution petition in E.P.No.46 of 2005 and since the defendant has remained exparte, a sale deed came to be executed on 29.03.2007 by the Court. Meanwhile, the defendant has filed an application in I.A.No.125 of 2007 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking orders to condone the delay of 1653 days in filing the petiton for setting aside the exparte decree dated 21.06.2002 and also an application for setting aside the exparte decree under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C.

3. The respondent/plaintiff has filed a counter statement raising

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