MEENA Vs. SAJJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant in O.S.No.3490 of 2006 on the file of the II Additional City Civil Court, Chennai is the petitioner in this Civil Revision Petition. THE respondent herein filed O.S.No.3490 of 2006 for recovery of a sum of Rs.5,58,000/- on the basis of a promissory note said to have been executed by the petitioner herein for a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- in favour of the plaintiff.

(2.) IT is the case of the respondent that the petitioner had also given her property measuring 1620 sq.ft., comprised in Natham Survey No.16-1/1, 1.19 situated at Jeyankondam Village, as Collateral security. On 20.09.2006, the petitioner/defendant entered appearance and failed to file a petition seeking leave to defend. Though the suit was adjourned twice to enable the petitioner to file a petition for leave to defend as no petition was filed and there was no representation for the petitioner, exparte decree was passed. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a Execution Petition to transfer the decree from the City Civil Court, Chennai to the District Court, Perambalur. E.P.No.85 of 2007 was taken by the District Court, Perambalur as per the transmit order dated 29.03.2007.

(3.) CONSIDERING the rival contentions, the court below has not accepted the explanation offered by the petitioner and by further pointing out that the petitioner has admitted the signature in the promissory note and had admitted that she had given the property as collateral security and since there was no valid defence in the suit, the court below dismissed the petition. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this court.