Judicial discretion allows condoning delay in filing applications when justified by substantial reasons and promoting justice.

ORDER

This civil revision petition challenges the order of the learned Principal District Judge at Coimbatore in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.S.No.685 of 2008 dated 06.12.2021. The civil revision petitioners are the proposed defendants 2 and 3 in the suit.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as per their ranks in the suit.

3. O.S.No.685 of 2008 was presented for the following reliefs:

“a) a decree of specific performance of the agreement for sale dated 05.05.2008 with respect to the suit property, directing the defendant to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff after receiving the balance sale consideration of Rs.14,95,000/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakhs Five Thousand only) and to produce the necessary clearance from the Highways Department and Tahsildar to show that there is no acquisition and tax receipts till date of execution of the sale deed and to put the plaintiff in possession of the suit properties within a time being fixed by this Court;

b) in default of such compliance by the defendant, this Court may be pleased to execute a registered sale deed in respect of the suit properties in favour of the plaintiff and put him in possession of the said property at the cost of the defendants;

c) restraining the defendant his men, relatives and agents from in anyway alienating or encumbering the suit properties till the execution of the sale deed by means of permanent injunction;

Alternatively:-

a) directing the defendant to pay the plaintiff a sum of Rs.5,16,766.61/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Sixteen Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty Six and Sixty One Paise only) with future interest at the rate of 12% per annum on Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) from the date of the suit till the date of payment;

b) creating charge over the suit properties for the payment of the aforesaid amount with future interest and costs;

c) directing the defendant to pay the cost of the suit to the plaintiff;

d) granting such other relief or relief's as this Court deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.

4. According to the plaintiff, he had entered into an agreement of sale with the original sole defendant, one P.Muthu. This agreement was entered on 05.05.2008. On the same day, the plaintiff had paid the said Muthu a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- as advance. Subsequently, on 21.05.2008, a further sum of Rs.2,50,000/- had been paid. The plaintiff alleged that Muthu had agreed to pay the balance of sale consideration of Rs.14,95,000/- and execute a sale deed. Shortly after entering into an agreement, the plaintiff came to know that the suit property was the subject matter of acquisition. When he enquired Muthu, he was informed that Muthu will produce a certificate stating that the property is not a subject matter of acquisition. Unfortunately, the said Muthu failed to produce the certificate as promised. Therefore on 29.07.2008, the plaintiff issued a notice expressing his readiness and willingness. The notice was returned unserved. Yet again, he renewed his request on 31.07.2008. This notice was received by the said Muthu and a reply was issued on 12.08.2008. As the demand of the plaintiff remained unsatisfied, he came forward with the suit for the aforesaid reliefs.

5. The suit was presented on 21.08.2008. Summons were served on the sole defendant, Muthu. He entered appearance on 18.09.2008. Subsequently, he passed away on 06.11.2008. The death was given as intimation to the plaintiff and the matter was adjourned for taking steps. The learned Trial Judge adjourned the matter for nearly seven months for the said purpose. As no steps were taken in