THANKAM Vs. C.P. IYYAKKU TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the complainant in O.S. No. 936/90 on the files of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Thrissur, as well as the petitioner in I.A. No. 6083/2000 filed in I.A. No. 990/2000 in the above O.S. The above Original Suit was one for partition and for permanent prohibitory injunction, I.A. No. 990/2000 is a petition to restore the Original Suit, which was dismissed for default. The suit was listed for trial on 19/2/2000. According to the petitioner, since a close relative expired on that day, he could not appear before court for trial. The learned counsel filed I.A. No. 947/2000 praying to adjourn the trial. But the suit was dismissed on 19/2/2000. He filed I.A. No. 990/2000, praying for the restoration of the suit. That petition was posted to 4/11/2000. Since there was no sitting on that day, the case was adjourned to 7/11/2000. Since the complainant was not present on 7/11/2000, I.A. No. 990/2000 was dismissed. There is no wilful laches on the part of the petitioner and hence I.A. No. 6083/2000 was filed to restore I.A. No. 990/2000 on the files.

(2.) RESPONDENTS 2 and 3 filed counter affidavits denying the averments in the petition and opposed the application. An enquiry was conducted and PW.1 was examined. After considering the evidence on record, the learned Sub Judge dismissed the application. The legality and propriety of the findings on which the application had been dismissed is under challenge in this revision petition. Respondent No. 8, in this revision petition, also filed a counter affidavit opposing the Civil Revision Petition.

(3.) PER contra, the learned counsel for the for the respondents advanced arguments to justify the findings in which the court below has dismissed the application.