MANIMEKALAI Vs. GOMATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ANIMADVERTING upon the order dated 29.6.2010 passed by the Sub-Court, Mettur, in I.A.No.243 of 2008 in O.S.No.106 of 2003, this civil revision petition is filed by the landlord.

(2.) NIGGARD and bereft of unnecessary details, the necessary and germane facts for the disposal of this revision would run thus: (i) The respondent herein, as plaintiff, filed the suit O.S.No.106 of 2003 seeking the following main relief: - to direct the respondent/defendant to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to the petitioner/plaintiff towards the damages and compensation. (extracted as such) (ii) It so happened that the revision petitioner/defendant, after filing the written statement, failed to participate in the proceedings whereupon ex-parte judgment and decree were passed. (iii) Subsequently, E.P.was filed by the respondent herein. On receipt of E.P. notice only, the revision petitioner herein came to know about the ex-parte decree having been passed as against her. Whereupon I.A.No.243 of 2008 was filed by her under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to get the delay of 1092 days condoned in filing the application to get set aside the ex-parte decree on the ground that on 8.11.2005, when the suit was listed for trial, she could not appear due to her ill-health and subsequently, owing to communication gap between her lawyer and herself, the matter could not be pursued. (iv) The trial Court, after hearing both sides dismissed the said application.

(3.) HEARD both sides.