GOVINDASAMY Vs. RAVICHANDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NOTICE before admission was given and the respondents are represented by counsel. The arguments advanced on both sides are heard.

(2.) THE plaintiff in O.S.No.165 of 2007 on the file of the Principal District Munsif -cum -Judicial Magistrate, Chengam, is the petitioner in the present revision. The defendants therein are the respondents in the revision. The suit came to be filed by the revision petitioner for a declaration that he is the absolute owner of the suit property and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same. The respondents are none other than the son of the revision petitioner born through his first wife and his wife (daughter -in -law of the revision petitioner).

(3.) THE learned trial Judge, after hearing, held that the delay was not 69 days as stated in the petition but was 97 days. It also accepted the contention of the respondents herein that they were prevented by a reasonable cause from filing the application to set aside the ex -parte decree in time and accordingly allowed the above said application stating that the delay in filing the application under Order IX, Rule 13 C.P.C. was to be condoned. The said order is challenged in the present revision.