K. DURAISWAMY Vs. SMT. K. RUKMINI AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In a suit for partition filed by the first respondent, the appellants were defendant Nos. 2 and 3. Common written statement was filed by defendant Nos. 1 to 3 and the plaintiff's claim for partition and separate possession of the suit property was opposed. Based on the pleadings, issues were raised on 07.02.2004. Plaintiff got examined herself as PW1 and marked two documents, as Exs.P1 and P2. Defendants did not lead any evidence. After hearing the arguments, suit was decreed on 19.09.2006 and the plaintiff was held entitled to ?th share in the suit schedule property.

(2.) Assailing the said decree, this appeal was filed on 09.01.2013, with a delay of 2214 days. To condone the said delay, LA.No. 1/2014 was filed.

(3.) The first appellant has sworn to the affidavit filed in support of the prayer in I.A.No. 1/2014 The main reason assigned is that the deponent was employed in NGEF. and the said establishment was closed during the year 2002 and thus, he became jobless and was doing piece work job all over India and in that process he used to stay outside for 15 to 20 days in a month and therefore, he could not concentrate on the pending suit. It was stated that when a notice of FDP No. 25015/2011 was received during Feb. 2012, the passing of impugned decree became known and this appeal was filed.