AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Duraiswamy, J.—Challenging the fair and final order passed in I.A.No. 96 of 2014 in I.A.No. 30 of 2013 in O.S.No. 36 of 2011 on the file of District Munsif Court, Sathankulam, the plaintiff has filed the above civil revision petition.
The plaintiff has filed the suit in O.S.No. 36 of 2011 for permanent injunction. The said suit was decreed ex parte, since the defendants remained absent. Thereafter, the defendants filed an application in I.A.No. 30 of 2013, to condone the delay of 529 days in filing the petition to set aside the ex parte decree and when the said application was pending for enquiry, the plaintiff filed an application in I.A.No. 96 of 2014 to re-open I.A.No. 30 of 2013.
When the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr. S.S. Sundar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that before the Trial Court, the revision petitioner has filed his counter and the application has been posted for enquiry and that the evidence was not closed yet. When the application is posted for enquiry and the enquiry in the application is yet to begin, I am of the view that there is no question of reopening the case at this stage.
In the affidavit filed in support of the application, the revision petitioner has stated that for the purpose of examining the Sub Registrar for producing a cancelled deed, dated 24.01.2014 reopening of the application is necessary. It is brought to the notice of this Court, the revision petitioner has obtained a certified copy of the cancellation deed dated 24.01.2014. Therefore, the Sub Registrar, cannot produce the original document before the Trial Court. That apart as already stated since the application was not closed and pending, there is no necessity for filing the present application to reopen the application for let in oral evidence.
In these circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with the fair and final order passed by the Trial Court. The civil revision petition is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.