SYED AHAMED Vs. THE JOINTCOMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGING the fair and final order passed I.A.No. 27 of 2011 in O.S.No. 39 of 2007 on the file of Principal District Court, Ramanathapuram, the defendants 1 and 2 have filed the above civil revision petition.

(2.) THE plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No. 39 of 2007 for declaration and recovery of possession. The suit was filed on 08.08.2007. Thereafter, the second defendant entered appearance in the suit on 13.02.2008 and on 04.06.2008, the defendants 1 and 3 were called absent and set exparte. Since the second defendant also failed to file his written statement, he was called absent and set exparte on 25.06.2008. Thereafter, on 12.08.2008, the Trial Court passed an exparte decree.

(3.) BEFORE the Execution Court, on 14.03.2011 the property could not be taken delivery, for want of police protection and help of VAO and Surveyor. Thereafter, on the next day 15.03.2011, the second defendant filed an application in I.A.No. 27 of 2011 on his behalf and also on behalf of the first respondent to condone the delay of 946 days to set aside the exparte decree dated 12.08.2008. When the first defendant remained absent before the Execution Court and when the notice sent to the first defendant could not be served and when property could not delivered for want of police protection on 14.03.2011, immediately the defendants 1 and 2 filed an application in I.A.No. 27 of 2011 to set aside the exparte decree. The conduct of the defendants would clearly establish that their only aim was to drag on the matter.