G ADILAKSHMI Vs. S ANBALAGAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two civil revision petitions are focussed as against the fair and decreetal orders dated 02.04.2012 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Tirupattur, Vellore District in I.A.No.2 of 2012 in CMA No.3 of 2008 and the fair and decreetal orders dated 22.11.2007 passed by the learned District Munsif, Tirupattur in I.A.No.250 of 2007 in O.S.No.335 of 2004 respectively.

(2.) HEARD both sides.

(3.) AT this juncture, I would like to observe that it is the duty of the transferee court to issue notice to both sides. However, the learned counsel for the plaintiff/respondent herein would submit that he received notice and entered appearance. But, the learned counsel for the defendant/revision petitioner herein would submit that no such notice was sent by the transferee court and the defendant was kept in the dark. Only on receipt of the E.P notice sent at the instance of the plaintiff, she came to know that an exparte decree was passed and whereupon, she approached her Advocate and filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of CPC to get set aside the exparte decree with an application to get the delay of 298 days condoned in filing the said application.