T.SUBRAMANIAN Vs. S.JANAKIAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Petition has been filed to get set aside the order dated 15.03.2012 passed in C.M.A.No.10 of 2007 on the file of the III Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai.

(2.) THE epitome and the long and short of the relevant facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this Civil Revision Petition would run thus: The petitioner herein happened to be the defendant in the suit based on mortgage filed by the respondent/plaintiff in O.S.No.787 of 1996. A preliminary decree was passed and thereafter, the final decree was passed. It so happened that the petitioner herein being the defendant filed I.A.No.1098 of 2004 for getting the exparte preliminary decree set aside on the ground that he was suffering from ill-health and he was a dwarf and he went to take treatment in Kerala and in the meanwhile, the preliminary decree was passed as against him. The lower Court after hearing both sides, dismissed the said application on the ground that there were no bona fides. The lower Court also observed that no application was filed to get the delay condoned. Thereafter, C.M.A.No.10 of 2007 was filed against the order of dismissal and the appellate Court also confirmed the order of the lower Court by giving a finding that not even an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, was filed.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the revision petitioner placing reliance on the grounds of revision, would submit that since the application in I.A.No.1098 of 2004 was filed within 30 days from the date of knowledge of the exparte decree, the question of filing the petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, would not arise. He would also pray that opportunity might be given to the petitioner to contest the matter as he discharged a part of the mortgage dues also.