VASANTHA Vs. GOPALAKRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT calls in question the order passed by the Ist Additional Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram in I.A.5468/2011 and I.A.5470/2011 in O.S.383/2008. O.S.383/2008 was one filed by the respondent seeking specific performance of a contract of sale of immovable property. The suit came to be decreed exparte. The interlocutory applications in question were filed seeking to set aside the exparte decree and to condone the delay of 213 days in filing the application. By the common order the court below has dismissed the applications.

(2.) THE court found that there is no evidence to prove that petitioner has undergone treatment in any Ayurveda Hospital. Learned counsel for the respondent would also point out that appellant had actually appeared and filed vakalath. On the other hand, the case of the appellant is that no notice is received in the instant suit. She had received notice in another suit. We notice that the suit is one for specific performance. According to the appellant, the property involved is 10 cents in Thiruvananthapuram. Appellant has three daughters, it is submitted. No doubt, the respondent also has a case that respondent had to sell another property for the purchase of plaint schedule property in this case.

(3.) WE further direct that, the amount which is already deposited by the respondent alleged to be Rs.19 lakhs (Rupees nineteen lakhs only) will be put in a Fixed Deposit bearing interest in a Nationalised Bank to the credit of the suit by the Court below. If the amount of costs is not paid or Rs.4.5 lakhs is not deposited as aforesaid, the appeal will stand dismissed. If the cost is paid and the amount is deposited as directed and this fact is brought to the notice of the Court below by either parties, the Ist Additional Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram will dispose of the suit within a period of four months from the date on which the fact is brought to the notice of the Court below by either party.