MUTHUSAMY Vs. AMMASI ALIAS MUTHU GOUNDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMIT. There was a delay of 117 days in re-presenting the appeal papers, to condone which, I.A.No. 170 of 1996 was filed and it was dismissed by the Sub-Court, Sankari. It is that order which is in challenge in this revision. In view of the judgments of this Court in the cases reported in 1978 T.N.L.J. 332 and 1993 T.N.L.J. 375, to the effect that, in matters like this, no notice need be sent to the party in opposition, I am inclined to dispose of the revision at the admission stage itself without ordering notice to the respondents.

(2.) PERUSED the affidavit filed in support of I.A.No.170 of 1996. Satisfied with the reasons contained therein. The approach of the learned Sub-Judge in refusing to condone the delay is erroneous. Consequently, the impugned order is set aside and the revision is allowed. As a result thereof, I.A. No.170 of 1996 would stand allowed as prayed for.