C.VENKATESAN Vs. KAALIYATHAL @ KALIYAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Sec. 115 of the Civil Procedure Code, against the fair and decretal order in I.A.No.393 of 2018 in O.S.No.38 of 2010, dtd. 27/9/2018 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Palani.

(2.) The short facts which give rise to the instant Civil Revision Petition are that the petitioner is the plaintiff before the trial Court. The petitioner/ plaintiff has filed a suit for specific performance in O.S.No.38 of 2010, which was ultimately decreed on 14/10/2010, directing the plaintiff to pay the balance sale consideration before the Court within a period of one month. However, it appears that the plaintiff did not pay the balance sale consideration of Rs.5,000.00 (Rupees Five Thousand only) as directed by the the decretal Court. However, he filed an application on 27/4/2018 for enlargement of time under Sec. 148 of C.P.C, in I.A.No.393 of 2018. The reason pleaded in the petition seeking for enlargement of time is that the mother of the petitioner/plaintiff was ill for a period of five years. Therefore, the ailment of his mother compelled him to take care of her, and that he took his mother to various hospitals for a period of five years, and that in the interregnum, there was sort of compromise talks, and that it was believed that the issue could be resolved through negotiation. In such a background, there was a delay of eight years.

(3.) However, the learned counsel for the respondents had strongly objected to the pleadings put forth by the plaintiff and it is pleaded in their counter statement that the very allegation in respect of the illness of plaintiff's mother and alleged negotiation is disputed by them. He further submits that the delay of eight years cannot be condoned at all and they further stated that the very sale agreement is nothing, but, a loan transaction. It is the specific submission of the respondents that the delay of eight years in paying the balance sale consideration would only probabilise the case of the defendants that the sale agreement was executed as security for a loan transaction and it is also submitted that the petitioner did not produce any records to prove the illness of his mother.