RAVI Vs. SUSILA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter is taken up for hearing through Video-Conferencing. The plaintiffs in OS No.78 of 2011 have come up with this Revision challenging an order dismissing their application for condonation of delay of 109 days in filing the application to restore the suit that was dismissed for default.

(2.) One Ravi filed a suit seeking permanent injunction. Since he died pending suit, his legal representatives were brought on record as plaintiffs 2 to 6 by an order made on 28.11.2016. Thereafter, steps were taken to amend the plaint complaining that the plaintiffs had encroached upon a portion of the suit property and recovery of possession was sought for. After the amendment, an additional written statement was also filed. The suit that was posted for trial was dismissed for default on 23.03.2017.

(3.) The plaintiffs came up with the instant application seeking condonation of delay of 109 days in filing an application to restore the suit. The third plaintiff filed the affidavit in support of the said application stating that he was conducting the suit proceedings on behalf of the other plaintiffs also and that he could not appear on the said date i.e., 23.03.2017 as he was affected with Jaundice and was taking native treatment.