L VARADARAJAN Vs. THOMAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondents in A.S. No. 168 of 1999 on the file of the District Court at Tuticorin, (now transferred to Sub-Court, Tuticorin and Renumbered as A.S. No. 133 of 1999) are the revision petitioners :

(2.) Petitioners are plaintiffs in O.S. No. 686 of 1996 on the file of the District Munsif's Court at Tuticorin. Their suit was decreed as per decree and judgment dated 12-10-1999. Respondents herein without filing a copy of the certified decree, filed an appeal before the District Judge, Tuticorin, along with an application I.A. No. 405 of 1999, praying to dispense with the production of certified copy of the decree for the present. In the affidavit in support of that application, it was stated by the respondents that though they have applied for the certified copy of the decree emergently on 13-10-1999 itself, the same has not been issued and if they are to wait till certified copy of decree is obtained, their rights will be prejudiced and they may be permitted to file appeal without the copy of decree and they undertook to produce the same as and when it is prepared. The District Judge, as per order dated 15-10-1999, dispensed with the production of certified copy of decree and they were directed to produce certified copy of decree of the trial Court, for which 15 days time was given. It is against that order, this revision is filed.

(3.) I ordered notice of motion, when the matter came up for admission and the learned counsel for respondents also entered appearance.