AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K. Kannan, J.—By the impugned order, the Court has set aside an ex parte decree on payment of cost. The suit was for declaration of title to immoveable property and the Court has observed that there was a justification only for some of the defendants to have remained ex parte, namely, defendants No. 1, 2 and for the minor defendants No. 7 to 13 but set aside the decree for all of them. Counsel for the petitioner argues that there was simply no justification for the defendants to remain ex parte. Defendants No. 1 & 2 had availed several opportunities and even before the Court set them ex parte, had imposed cost but even then, they were not willing to give their evidence. The absence from Court was deliberate and no leniency shall be given to them. If the Court below has thought fit to make an intervention and allow for a contest of the case in relation to immoveable property to be made through a trial Court and had also imposed substantial cost of Rs. 40,000/-, I will not find any reason to interfere with the same.
The civil revision is dismissed.