MANIKANDAN Vs. SUMATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the order, dated 25.04.2016 made in I.A. No. 204 of 2012 in O.S. No.8 of 2009 on the file of the learned Additional Subordinate Court, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District.

(2.) The respondent/respondent/Plaintiff has filed a suit in O.S. No.8 of 2009 on the file of the Additional Subordinate Court, Kumbakonam. An exparte order was passed on 28.08.2009 against the revision petitioners herein and against the exparte decree, the revision petitioners have filed a petition in I.A. No.204 of 2012 in O.S. No.8 of 2009 to condone the delay of 1021 days in filing the petition to set aside the exparte decree and the same was dismissed with Costs. Hence, the revision petitioners are before this Court.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners submitted that the suit has been filed for partition among the three family members only and the second respondent herein who is none other than the mother of the respondent herein. He further submitted that without considering the fact that the respondent chose to file the above suit eventhough these petitioners want to compromise the partition in an amicable manner and on this ground alone the petition filed by the petitioners to condone the delay ought to have been allowed. He further submitted that the suit has been filed by suppressing the fact that the property of a local temple was also included in the schedule filed along with the plaint without joining the necessary temple authorities and hence the suit is liable to be dismissed for non joinder of necessary parties. He prayed to allow the Civil Revision Petition.