S. RANI AND OTHERS Vs. THERASA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision Petition is filed against the dismissal of Sec. 47 Application made in O.S. No. 2543 of 1997.

(2.) The Revision Petitioners would contend that the ex-parte decree, which was obtained in O.S. No. 2543 of 1997, was first came to their knowledge only on the notice issued in the execution stage. In fact, earlier, they filed Application to set aside the ex-parte that too, with delay and the same was dismissed. But their main contention was that the Suit itself is not maintainable as originally the date of agreement was 20.12.1982 and the period for Specific Performance was three months and thereafter, they have not issued any notice of their willingness to perform their contract. Thereafter, they issued a notice dated 26.2.1992 which was replied on 8.3.1992. Immediately, thereafter, a Suit was filed in the year 1992 seeking specific performance. In the said Suit, they contended that the Suit is barred by limitation on the ground that the agreement is of the year 1982 and the period is only three months. Unfortunately, the Suit was decreed ex-parte and for which, they have also filed Application to set aside the ex-parte decree, which was also dismissed. Thereafter, they have filed Sec. 47 Application stating that the decree itself is nullity since it is barred by limitation. But the said Application was also dismissed.

(3.) Aggrieved against the same, they have come forward with the present Civil Revision Petition.