JERINA BEGUM Vs. V SULTAN ABDUL KADAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent herein filed O.S.No.22 of 2004 before the District Munsif Court, Nagapattinam, seeking a decree for mandatory injunction to remove the construction put up by the petitioner herein. THE petitioner herein had entered appearance through a counsel and filed the written statement. THE suit was listed for trial on 10.11.2006 and as the Presiding Officer was on leave, it was adjourned to 13.11.2006 and on that date, the respondent herein was examined and documents were marked and the suit was adjourned to 15.11.2006 for cross-examination of P.W.1 and on that date, the learned counsel for the petitioner herein reported no instructions and hence the suit was decreed exparte.

(2.) THEREAFTER, the petitioner filed an Interim Application to set aside the exparte decree with a petition in I.A.No.168 of 2007 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 81 days in filing the petition to set-aside the exparte decree. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition to condone the delay, it was stated by the petitioner that as she was laid up with jaundice and was taking native treatment, she could not contact her counsel and only after coming to know about the execution proceedings initiated by the respondent, she came to know about the exparte decree and immediately contacted her counsel and made arrangements to file the aforesaid petitions.

(3.) THOUGH in the above Civil Revision Petition, the respondent has been served and his name shown in the cause list, he is neither appearing in person nor through counsel, hence, the above Civil Revision Petition is being disposed of on merits.