RAMANATHAN Vs. DHANABAKKIYAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order of the principal District Munsif, Ramanathapuram passed in I. A. No. 1611/1994 in o. S. No. 445/1991, dated 23. 08. 1996, dismissing the Petition filed under Or. 47 r. 1 CPC and Section 151 CPC declining to review the earlier order passed in i. A. No. 1353/1994. Defendant is the Revision Petitioner.

(2.) REVISION Petitioner/defendant is said to have borrowed a sum of Rs. 10,000/- from the Respondent/plaintiff on 18. 10. 1988, executing a promissory Note. On 21. 11. 1988, a sum of Rs. 1,000/- was paid making an endorsement. Case of the Plaintiff is that inspite of repeated demands and issuance of notice on 04. 10. 1991, the Defendant has not paid the amount. Hence the suit O. S. No. 445/1995 was filed, claiming Rs. 14,310/-, with subsequent interest.

(3.) AGGRIEVED over the dismissal of I. A. No. 1611/2004, the defendant has preferred this revision. It is contended that under Section 148 cpc, the Court can extend the time for payment of cost. The learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner has submitted that the Court below erred in not taking note of the substantial defence put-forth by the Defendant and the explanation offered by him for not paying the cost before 26. 09. 1994. Submitting that misquoting of the provision would not be a ground for disallowing the application, the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner/defendant has relied upon 2000 III CTC 228 [pakkiammal Vs. Anaiappan].