JUDGMENT

Attempt of the petitioner - 4th defendant to set aside the ex parte preliminary and final decree passed against him in a suit for partition having failed, is under challenge in this Original Petition. The grievance of the petitioner is now confined to the final decree.

2. There is a delay of 3090 days in seeking to set aside ex parte preliminary decree and a delay of 1900 days as regards setting aside of the final decree. The petitioner who is the 4th defendant in the suit is one of the legal heirs of late Kuttappan. The other legal heirs were parties to the proceedings. According to the petitioner, he was employed at Bangalore and was not aware of the suit and decree.

3. In Ext P6 order dated 23.12.2009 the learned Munsiff has observed that going by the final decree proceedings, notice was issued to the petitioner at the Bangalore address by registered post and notice was served. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner fails. This is coupled with the fact that his siblings contesting the proceedings and also that pending the suit marriage of the petitioner was held at his native place. As noticed by the courts below the contention of the petitioner that he was not aware