MANICKAM Vs. SUNDARAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been filed against the order of dismissal passed by the lower Court in I.A.No.38 of 2010 dated 09.04.2010, an application to condone the delay of 656 days in filing an application to set aside the exparte preliminary decree.

(2.) HEARD Mr.I.C.Vasudevan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.Hema Sampath, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent.

(3.) I have given anxious thoughts to the arguments advanced on either side. The disputed facts are that the suit was filed by the respondents for partition and separate possession of the only suit property namely a house belonging to mother of the parties and the respondents as plaintiffs, have claimed 5/6 share in the suit properties on the foot of the Will executed by the mother. The said suit was contested by the petitioner as a sole defendant and since written statement was not filed on his side, he was set exparte and a preliminary decree has been passed. Thereafter, a final decree application has been filed in I.A.No.405 of 2007 in O.S.No.114 of 2006 and the same was also served against the petitioner and he remained exparte and an advocate commissioner was appointed for suggesting the modes of division in the suit property and the petitioner had filed the application to set aside the exparte preliminary decree on 09.07.2009 with an application to condone the delay in I.A.No.38 of 2010. The said application was disposed of by the lower Court, after enquiry and against which the present revision has been filed.