MUTHULAKSHMI Vs. THENAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petition filed under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, by the

(2.) nd respondent in S.A. No. 2055 of 2002 to condone the delay of 320 days in filing Review Petition against the judgment and decree dtd. 25/10/2018 in S.A. No. 2055 of 2002. 2.In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the petitioner, Muthulakshmi claimed that a copy of the judgment and decree dtd. 25/10/2018 in S.A. No. 2055 of 2002 was furnished by her advocate only in the month of February 2020. She further stated that owing to the Covid 19 pandemic situation, she was not able to file the Review Petition. She further stated that taking advantage of the judgment, the respondents are taking steps to alienate the suit schedule property. She claimed that she has a prima facie case. She therefore sought condonation of the delay of 320 days in filing Review Petition.

(3.) A memo was filed by the Counsel for the petitioner seeking to dispense with service of notice to the 2nd and 3rd respondents. It was stated that the 2nd respondent was the mother of the petitioner and the 3rd respondent had not participated in the judicial proceedings when the Second Appeal was heard.