KANDASAMY Vs. KALIANNAGOUNDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this Revision Petition is dismissal of the application I. A. No. 1615/2004, declining to condone the delay of 925 days.

(2.) FACTUAL background of the case are as follows:-

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that though there are lapses on the part of the Petitioner, he has substantial defence to put forth in the Promissory Note Suit and an opportunity is to be given to him. Submitting that the discretion under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is to be construed liberally, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner placed reliance upon the oft quoted Judgment of the Supreme Court reported in 1998 AIR SCW 3139 = (1998) 7 SCC 123.