YASHODA Vs. PERUMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order-dated 18.06.2003 in I.A.No.662 of 2003 in O.S.No.735 of 1990, on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Salem.

(2.) The revision petitioners are defendants 7 to 9 in the suit, which suit was filed by the respondents 2 and 3 herein for partition. In the said suit, the first respondent herein, namely, Perumal was the fourth defendant who remained ex parte. But, however, the first respondent gave evidence on behalf of the plaintiffs. Thereafter the first defendant/fourth defendant filed an application under Order 9 Rule 7 under Section 151 CPC, to set aside the ex parte order dated 12.10.1990 and the same came to be allowed. Aggrieved by the same, the defendants 7 to 9 have preferred this civil revision petition.

(3.) The first respondent/fourth defendant in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, has stated that the defendants 1 to 3 and 5 are his brothers and 6th defendant is his paternal uncle. The suit was filed by his sister for partition and allotment of their share in the suit property. He was set ex parte on 12.10.1990 and he has been under the hope all along, that his brothers/defendants 2,3 and 5 would help him to get his lawful share also in the entire suit property. But, it was not done so and only in the said circumstances, he has filed the application claiming his share, i.e., 8/56th share and prayed for setting aside the ex parte decree passed against him dated 12.10.1990.