NATTAN AMBALAM Vs. DHANALAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision Petitioner/Respondent/Defendant has filed the present Civil Revision Petition as against the order dated 12.03.2001 passed in E.A. No. 81 of 2000 in E.P. No. 217 of 1996 in O.S. No. 43 of 1991 by the learned District Munsif, Melur.

(2.) The learned District Munsif, Melur, while passing the orders in E.A. No. 81 of 2000 in E.P. No. 217 of 1996 on 12.03.2001, has among other things observed that E.A. No. 81 of 2000 will be allowed on condition that the Respondent/Petitioner paying a cost of Rs. 500/- to the revision Petitioner/Defendant before 20.03.2001 failing which the petition will stand dismissed.

(3.) According to the learned Counsel for the revision Petitioner/Defendant, the order passed by the Executing Court in E.A. No. 81 of 2000 in E.P. No. 217 of 1996 on 12.03.2001, is contrary to law and an irregular one. According to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner/Defendant, the Executing Court should have-seen that any application for setting aside the ex-parte order as per Rule 105 of Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure as per Rule 106(3) must be filed within 30 days from the date of the order, but this aspect of the matter has not been appreciated by the Executing Court in a proper perspective which has resulted in an erroneous order being passed in E.A. No. 81 of 2000.