NALINI Vs. BHARGAVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision and Original Petition are in challenge of judgment dated 29.09.1997 in O.S.No.403 of 1996 of the Munsiff's Court, Mavelikkara. Learned Munsiff, by the said judgment found that the suit filed by the petitioner is barred by constructive res judicata under explanation IV to S.11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, "the Code") and consequently dismissed the suit.

(2.) Challenging that judgment, petitioner filed C.R.P.No.394 of 2011 on 25.08.2011 with C.M.Appl.No.428 of 2011 to condone the delay of 4890 days. That application was allowed and the delay was condoned on condition of deposit of cost of Rs.3,000/- with the High Court Advocates Welfare Fund Trust. That condition was complied and the civil revision was admitted as per order dated 09.07.2012.

(3.) When the civil revision came up for hearing before me during early, 2013, I expressed doubt whether the Civil Revision is maintainable since whether it is by a 'finding' or by 'judgment', learned Munsiff found that the suit to be not maintainable and consequently dismissed the suit and hence remedy of petitioner was to prefer a regular appeal challenging the judgment and decree dismissing the suit. Some arguments were raised whether it was possible to convert the civil revision into an Original Petition under Art.227 of the Constitution. Learned counsel for the respondents asserted that the Court cannot grant such permission when the Civil Revision is not maintainable. Obviously understanding the difficulty in sustaining the Civil Revision or converting it into an Original Petition, petitioner filed O.P(C).No.903 of 2013 on 01.03.2013 challenging the above said judgment of learned Munsiff.