RAJAMANICKAM Vs. MUTHU NAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 17.11.2009, passed by the Principal District Munsif Court, Ulundurpet, in I.A.No.75 of 2008.

(2.) THE petitioner herein is the defendant in O.S.No.226 of 2006 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Ulundurpet. The respondent filed the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.30,268.75, on the basis of the promissory note, dated 03.03.2004, said to have been executed by the petitioner in favour of the respondent. Though the petitioner received summons in the suit on 31.07.2006, he did not evince any interest in contesting the suit. Hence, the suit was decreed ex parte on 02.08.2006. Aggrieved by the said ex parte decree, the petitioner filed an interlocutory application, viz., I.A.No.75 of 2008, to condone the delay of 403 days in filing the application to set aside the ex parte decree, wherein, he contended that, when he received the suit summon on 31.07.2006, he was bed -ridden and was taking indigenous medicine. Soon after his recovery, he went to Kerala, for his livelihood and worked there as a collie. Since his health got deteriorated there too, he returned to his Village again. In the interregnum period, he could not follow his case diligently.

(3.) MR .T.Gandhi, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent has filed the suit on the basis of a forged promissory note, hence, the petitioner may be given an opportunity to contest the case on merits. Moreover, the petitioner was suffering from ailment in the year, 2006, and, he had also gone to Kerala for avocation. Hence, the petitioner could not follow the suit diligently. That apart, there is no material evidence to show that the petitioner had deliberately prolonged the matter. Therefore, the learned counsel prayed that the delay may be condoned.