TARACHAND Vs. KATHIJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order and decreetal order dated 4. 10. 2002 made in I. A. No. 21495/2000 in O. S. No. 50/1986 on the file of the II Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, dismissing the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, declining to condone the delay of 3,290 days in filing the petition to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of the Petitioner in I. A. No. 8353/1991. The legal heirs of the deceased Inderchand Bothra are the Revision Petitioners.

(2.) RELEVANT facts could briefly be stated thus :-O. S. No. 50/1986:-

(3.) THE Defendant Inderchand Bothra has filed the Written Statement denying the execution of the suit agreement of sale. According to the Defendant, the Plaintiff has been a tenant under the Defendant. In order to avoid eviction from the demised property, the Plaintiff has filed the suit with false allegations. The Defendant has never executed any agreement of sale. The alleged agreement of sale dated 7. 12. 1985 is a forged one. In such circumstances, the Plaintiff is not entitled to the relief of specific performance of contract.