##PAGE1##

C.R.P.(MD) No.1744 of 2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 24.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN

C.R.P.(MD) No.1744 of 2023 and

CMP(MD) No.8688 of 2023

1.S.M.Sheikh Mansur

2.S.M.Naina Mohammed 3.S.M.Seiyathu Fathima

4.S.M.Shajitha Banu ... Petitioners vs.

1.P.S.Mydeen @ Haja Mydeen, rep. through his power agent,

N.M.Mohammed Yusuf

2.Sulaika Beevi

3.P.S.Sahul Hammed

4.P.S.Mohammed Mydeen

5.Jeenaththunnisha

6.Thilsath Begam 7.Mansura Begam

8.Ushmani

1/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2026 09:25:29 pm )

##PAGE2##

C.R.P.(MD) No.1744 of 2023

Ahamed Meeral (died)

9.Rahman Beevi Abulfaraak (died)

10.P.S.Hajar Fathima

11.M.A.Jabarullah

12.M.A.Iqbal

13.M.A.Kaleel Rahman ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order passed in I.A.No.17 of 2022 in O.S.No.172 of 2012 dated 27.10.2022 on the file of the Additional

Subordinate Court, Tirunelveli.

For Petitioners : Mr.Pakiyamuthu for Mr.H.Arumugam

For R1 & R2 : Ms.V.Janaki Devi

For R3, R4, R8, R9 & R11 to R13: No appearance

For R10 : Mr.D.Nallathambi

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition challenges the order passed in

I.A.No.17 of 2022 in O.S.No.172 of 2012, dated 27.10.2022, by the

learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Tirunelveli.

2/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2026 09:25:29 pm )

##PAGE3##

C.R.P.(MD) No.1744 of 2023

2.The Civil Revision Petitioners are the defendants 6 to 9. They

filed an application under Order IX Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The said application came to be dismissed by the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Tirunelveli on 27.10.2022. Hence, this

Revision.

3.Heard Mr.Pakiyamuthu for the petitioners, Ms.V.Janaki Devi

for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.D.Nallathambi for the 10^th

respondent.

4.O.S.No.172 of 2012 is a suit for partition and separate

possession. The Civil Revision Petitioners/defendants 6 to 9 are not the sharers, but they are the purchasers of the property. The suit was presented arraying them as parties. Despite service of summons, the defendants did not file their written statement. The defendants 6, 8 and 9 were set ex parte on 28.08.2012. The 7^th defendant was set ex parte on 22.04.2013. The suit itself came to be dismissed for default

on 20.01.2017.

5.The plaintiffs filed an application to restore the suit along with

condonation of delay application. The application came to be

3/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2026 09:25:29 pm )

##PAGE4##

C.R.P.(MD) No.1744 of 2023

dismissed on 15.02.2018. Finally, after this Court intervened in revision, the suit stood restored on 04.07.2022. It is thereafter, the defendants 6 to 9 filed applications to set aside the ex parte orders dated 28.08.2012 and 22.04.2013. By the impugned orders, the learned Judge dismissed the applications, stating that no explanation

was given by the defendants for a period of 10 years and more.

6.The learned counsel on both sides reiterated the contentions

they placed before the Court below.

7.Mr.Packiyamuthu urged that being purchasers of the

property, in case, an ex parte order is not set aside, they will be put to irreparable loss and prejudice. In addition, he points out that they

have also filed the written statement together with a counter-claim.

8.Ms.V.Janaki Devi urges that the applications have been filed

only to drag on the matter and thereby, deny the plaintiffs' right to see

the end of the suit.

9.I have carefully considered the submissions of both sides. I

have gone through the records.

4/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2026 09:25:29 pm )

##PAGE5##

C.R.P.(MD) No.1744 of 2023

10.Though the submissions made on behalf of defendants 6 to 9

that the suit itself had been dismissed in the year 2017 and restored in the year 2022, is attractive at the first blush, but on a closer scrutiny, it is without any substance. The defendants 6, 8 and 9 & 7 had been set ex parte in August 2012 and April 2013, respectively

Click Here to Read the rest of this document