JUDGMENT

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the order passed in I.A.No.563 of 2018 in G.W.O.P.No.28 of 2017 dated 27.09.2018 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Tiruchirappalli.

2.The appellant is the father of the minor child, namely Puzhal Amuthan and he has filed a petition in G.W.O.P.No.28 of 2017 for appointing him as the guardian for the minor child and seeking permission to visit the child during the pendency of the case. That petition was dismissed for default. Against which, the appellant has filed a restoration petition in I.A.No.563 of 2018 before the learned Principal District Judge, Tiruchirappalli. The restoration petition was dismissed by the learned District Judge. Against the same, the appellant has preferred an appeal.

3.On the side of the appellant, it is stated that the appellant was present before the trial Court but he could not hear the number of the case at the time of calling and the case was dismissed for default. The appellant filed the restoration petition within a period of fifteen days and the appellant must be given an opportunity to put forth his case and prayed the appeal to be allowed.

4.On the side of the respondent, it is stated that the minor child is in the custody of the wife. When the case was posted to 18.06.2018, the appellant claimed that the appellant was available outside the Court but he could not hear the case number being called by the Court. Since the appellant blamed the Court, the petition was dismissed and the reasons stated by the appellant are not reasonable and prayed the appeal to be dismissed.

5.Records perused. The contention of the appellant is that he was available outside the Court on 18.06.2018 but he could not hear his case being called by the Court. No records was filed by the appellant to prove that the appellant was waiting outside the Court hall. When all other persons waiting outside the Court can hear their case called, the appellant is claiming that he could not hear the number being called by the Court. Anyhow this case is relating to the custody of a minor child. The appellant has filed the restoration petition within a period of nine days from the date of dismissal of the case. In the above circumstances, an opportunity for the appellant to put forth his case is to be given in the interest of justice.

6.Hence, the order passed in I.A.No.563 of 2018 in G.W.O.P.No.28 of

2017 dated 27.09.2018 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Tiruchirappalli is set aside and this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed on condition of payment of costs of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) to the respondent on or before 26.04.2021. Post the matter 'for reporting compliance' on

28.04.2021. 15.04.2021 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No MRN Note : Issue order copy on 16.04.2021.

R. THARANI, J.

MRN To

1.The Principal District Judge, Trichirappalli.

C.M.A.(MD)No.1207 of 2018

15.04.2021