AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The Honourable Mr. Justice C.S. Karnan
The revision Petitioner/first Defendant has filed the above revision petition to set aside the order passed in I.A. No. 597 of 2010 in O.S. No.
394 of 2004 dated 06.01.2011 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Madurai Town.
The brief facts of the case are as follows:
The first Respondent/plaintiff has filed a suit in O.S. No. 394 of 2004 against the revision Petitioner and two others restraining the Respondents not
to interfere with the Plaintiff''s peaceful possession. the said suit was resisted by the revision Petitioner after filing written statement.
On 18.04.2005, the suit was called. At that time, the revision Petitioner did not appear due to ill-health. Therefore, the suit was set ex parte.
Thereafter, the revision Petitioner has filed an interlocutory application in I.A. No. 597 of 2010 in O.S. No. 394 of 2004 with a delay of 1912
days, to set aside the said ex parte decree. During pendency of the said interlocutory application, the revision Petitioner had filed a revision petition
under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before this Court for disposal of the said interlocutory application at the earliest. On 02.11.2010, this
Court had directed the learned Additional District Munsif, Madurai town to dispose of the I.A. No. 597 of 2010 in O.S. No. 394 of 2004, within
a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Court order.
Thereafter, the said application was heard by the learned Additional District Munsif, Madurai Town, and he dismissed the condone delay
petition, on 06.01.2011. At the time of hearing, the 2nd Respondent was called absent and the 3rd Respondent''s counsel had opposed the
condone delay petition.
Against the said dismissal order passed in I.A. No. 597 of 2010, the above revision has been filed by the 1st Defendant.
The Learned Counsel for the revision Petitioner argued that the notices were served on the Respondents. The Learned Counsel further
submitted that the injunction suit has been filed by the first Respondent herein/plaintiff and that it is a title suit. In the said suit, several issues arise for
sorting out the remedies to the parties. Therefore, proper adjudication is required in this case to arrive at a correct conclusion. As per ex parte
decree, the Plaintiff is enjoying the court order. Therefore if the suit is restored on the file of the learned judge and if it is disposed of on merits, the
interest of the Respondents will not be prejudiced. On the other hand, if the condone delay petition is not allowed, the revision Petitioner will be
put into irreparable loss and hardship. The Learned Counsel further argued that the Plaintiff has sought remedy against the Defendants including the
revision Petitioner. As such, the Plaintiff has to establish her case after adducing evidence including documentary evidence, in the presence of
Defendants. The Learned Counsel further submitted that the ex parte decree can be set aside at any time, in the interest of justice. The Learned
Counsel has given an assurance that the revision Petitioner will co-operate for speedy disposal of the suit.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and arguments advanced by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, this Court is of the
considered view that all cases shall be disposed of on merits after hearing the submissions of all the parties, as this Court feels that only then proper
adjudication can be done and judicial remedy can be granted to the parties. Therefore, this Court is inclined to allow this revision petition with the
condition that the revision Petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs. 1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) to the first Respondent/plaintiff/Nagammal, within a
period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. After such a condition has been complied with, the learned Additional District Munsif,
Madurai has to restore the suit in O.S. No. 394 of 2004 after observing legal formalities. Further, the learned Judge shall dispose the case within a
period of six months, from the date of such compliance, without being influenced by this Court''s discussion. Accordingly ordered.
In the result, the above civil revision petition is disposed of with the above observations.