RAJARATHINAM Vs. NATARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the respondent.

(2.) THIS Civil Revision Petition has been filed, challenging the order and decretal order, dated 22.08.2008 made in I..A.No.77 of 2006 in O.S.No.200 of 2000 on the file of the Sub-Judge, Ariyalur.

(3.) IN the affidavit filed before the Court below, the petitioner / judgment-debtor has stated that he was suffering from jaundice, hence, he could not appear before the Court below for 963 days and file a petition to set aside the exparte decree. If that reason is bonafide, it could not have been possible for the petitioner to engage a counsel and appear in the Execution Proceedings on 27.02.2004, without filing an application to set aside the exparte decree, the petitioner has simply stated that he was suffering from jaundice for 963 days, without any supporting materials.