THANGIAN Vs. RAMASWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is against the order passed bythelearned Sub Judge, Pattukottai dated 9.12.1986 dismissing the application to restore the appeal which was dismissed for default.

(2.) THE plaintiff who was the appellant before the Sub Judge, Pattukottai is the appellant herein.

(3.) THE respondent in his counter contends as follows: The appellant could have brought the records before the hearing date if only he had made a trip to Madras to meet his advocate. The revision filed by the appellant was dismissed by the High Court. The appellant wants to drag on the litigation. His claim that his child was unwell and he is attending on it on 26.2.1986 is not true. Party -s presence in court when the appeal is being argued is not necessary. If he had given instructions to his advocate, the advocate would have got on with the appeal. The petition is frivolous and is liable to be dismissed.