V AMUTHA Vs. VENKATESAN; KRISHNAVENI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the fair and final order passed in I.A.No.214 of 2012 in O.S.No.493 of 2008 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Chengalpattu, the plaintiff has filed the above Civil Revision Petition.

(2.) The plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.493 of 2008 for declaration and recovery of possession.

(3.) Since the defendants failed to appear before the trial Court, the trial Court passed an exparte decree on 02.03.2010. Thereafter, the defendants filed an application in I.A.No.214 of 2012 to condone the delay of 750 days in filing the petition to set aside the exparte decree dated 02.03.2010. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the defendants have stated that the 1st defendant's father was suffering from cardiac problem and kidney failure and therefore, the defendants went to their native place at Tirunelveli District to the take care of the 1st defendant's father. Further, they have stated that the 2nd defendant was also taking treatment under a Gynecologist. That apart, the defendants have stated that they came to know about the exparte decree only when they received summons in the Execution Petition in E.P.No.10 of 2011. The plaintiff filed her counter disputing the averments stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition. The trial Court allowed the application stating that the delay should be condoned in order to give a fair chance to proceed with the case.