LAWS(MAD)-2016-10-18

S.LEELAVATHI Vs. K.SUBRAMANIAM

Decided On October 20, 2016
S.LEELAVATHI Appellant
V/S
K.SUBRAMANIAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the order passed in I.A.No.506 of 2014 in O.S.No.268 of 2008 on the file of the Principal District Court, Tiruppur, the 1st defendant has filed the above Civil Revision Petition.

(2.) The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.268 of 2008 for specific performance.

(3.) The brief case of the petitioner/1st defendant is as follows: Since the 1st defendant failed to appear before the trial Court, she was set exparte and an exparte decree was passed on 18.09.2009. Subsequently, the 1st defendant filed an application in I.A.No.506 of 2014 to condone the delay of 957 days in filing the application to set aside the exparte decree. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the 1st defendant has stated that the 2nd defendant is her daughter and the 3rd defendant is her son. Further, she has stated that her daughter is in the USA for more than 14 years. In paragraph-3, the 1st defendant has stated that she did not receive any notice or summon in the suit and that she is not in the habit of reading magazines and news dailies. Further, she has stated that she did not have good understanding with her son and the son had not cared to take care of her and they have quarrels and misunderstanding frequently. She has also stated that she and her son are not in talking terms. He also wanted to grab the entire property for himself, for which she did not agree. Keeping all these in his mind, he never disclosed anything to her. The 1st defendant has stated that only on 12.04.2012, when her relative anxiously enquiry her whether she had one-third share in the property and that she had lost her property, then she immediately contacted her lawyer and verified all the facts and only then, it came to light that there is an exparte decree on 18.09.2009. The application has been filed by the 1st defendant on 01.06.2012. In these circumstances, the 1st defendant prayed for condonation of the delay of 957 days in filing the application to set aside the exparte decree.