INDIRA Vs. E. KAMALAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to condone the delay of 357 days in filing the appeal suit, challenging the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.6454 of 2013 dated 03.07.2018.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners made a submission that the delay occurred is neither willful nor wanton and on account of the mistakes committed by the erstwhile counsel, who was representing the petitioner.

(3.) In paragraph 7 of the affidavit filed in support of the miscellaneous petition, it is stated that the petitioners were in touch with the erstwhile counsel and unfortunately, there was no response. Subsequently, when the petitioners tried to reach the counsel, he advised the petitioners to settle the matter and to sell the property to the 5th respondent, which was not acceptable to the petitioners. Aggrieved over the same, the previous counsel had not appeared before the trial Court and the said fact was not disclosed to the petitioners. Subsequently, the petitioners received the summons from the II Additional City Civil Court, Chennai on 12.09.2019 that Mr.Arun, T.K.S.Kumar, H.Hemamalini, M.Usha filed the suit in O.S.No.5913 of 2019 for declaration that they are the owners of the property and for recovery of possession, for mandatory injunction and for damages, and on receipt of the summons, the petitioners enquired with the erstwhile counsel and thereafter, they came to know that he had not appeared before the Trial Court and the suit in O.S.No.6454 of 2013 was dismissed by the XVII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai by the judgment and decree dated 03.07.2018.