BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 06.02.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR C.R.P(MD). No.2495 of 2025 P.Paramasivam ... Revision Petitioner/Petitioner Vs K.Arulkumar ... Respondent/Respondent PRAYER :-Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order dated 11.06.2025 passed in I.A.no.3 of 2025 in O.S.No.151 of 2022 in so far as it imposes a condition to deposit one half of the suit claim and the consequential order dated 26.06.2025 on the file of the learned District Judge, Karur.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Suresh For Respondent : Mr.A.Mohamed Haneef for Mr.M.P.Senthil

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the order dated 11.06.2025 passed in I.A.No.3 of 2025 in O.S.No.151 of 2022 in so far as it imposes a condition to deposit one half of the suit claim and the consequential order dated 26.06.2025 on the file of the learned District Judge, Karur.

2. T he brief facts are as follows:

The revision petitioner, who is the defendant in the suit, had filed a written statement. Thereafter, the suit was dismissed for non- prosecution and an ex-parte decree came to be passed. Subsequently, an Execution Petition was filed. The revision petitioner, who is the judgment debtor, filed an application to set aside the ex-parte order with a delay of 570 days in representing the same. The trial Court, while allowing the application, imposed an onerous condition directing the revision petitioner to deposit 50% of the decree amount, i.e., Rs.7,50,000/-. Challenging the said condition, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent contended that the revision petitioner had not furnished proper reasons for the delay in representation.

4. When an application is filed for condonation of delay, particularly in respect of delay in representation, the Court is required to examine only the reasons assigned for such delay. Imposing a condition directing deposit of 50% of the decree amount is highly onerous one. Therefore, the order passed by the trial Court is set aside. Instead of directing deposit of 50% of the decree amount, this Court is inclined to impose a cost of Rs.10,000/- on the revision petitioner and the delay stands condoned subject to payment of the said cost. The said amount shall be paid within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

Speaking : Yes / No 06.02.2026 NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Indu To The District Court, Karur.

N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.

Indu

06.02.2026