Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J
R.Shanmugham – Appellant
Versus
R.Selvaraj – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to delay in filing an appeal. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. opposition's claims regarding delay justification. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. principles guiding courts on condonation of delay. (Para 9 , 12) |
| 4. court's discretion in delay condonation. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. final conclusion allowing the appeal. (Para 13) |
ORDER
This civil revision petition has been filed challenging the order dated 20.07.2023 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Salem, dismissing the application in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in the unnumbered appeal suit of 2023 by the 1st defendant in the suit under Order XLI and Rule 3(A) of CPC praying to condone the delay of 634 days in filing the appeal.
2. The revision petitioner is the 1st defendant, the respondents 2 and 3 are the defendants 2 and 3, and the 1st respondent is the plaintiff in O.S.No.67 of 2008.
3. The said suit was filed seeking a preliminary decree for partition and division of the suit properties into four equal shares, allotment of one such share to the plaintiff, separate possession of the allotted share, and for mesne profits.
4. The contention of the 1st defendant is that the suit was decreed on merits on
18.08.2009, and the 1st defendant’s appea
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
