MINOR YUVASRI Vs. GOMATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who are shown as defendants in O. S. No.89 of 2002 and who suffered an exparte decree in a suit for cancellation of the earlier partition, have brought forth this Civil Revision petition.

(2.) Challenge is made to the order in I. A. No.23 of 2007 whereby they sought condonation of delay of 355 days in making the application to set aside the exparte decree.

(3.) The respondents herein filed O. S. No.89 of 2002 for the relief of cancellation of the alleged partition of the year 1995 and for other reliefs. It is not in controversy that these petitioners, who are shown as defendants, entered appearance and filed written statement. After framing issues, the matter was posted for trial finally during December, 1995. PW1 was examined in chief and cross-examined in part and it was adjourned for number of occasions. Neither the defendants nor the counsel was present and thus the exparte decree came to be passed. In order to set aside the exparte decree, an application was filed. In doing so, there was a delay of 355 days. In order to condone the delay, I. A. No.23 of 2007 was filed. On contest, the said application was dismissed. Now the revision has arisen at the instance of the petitioners/defendants.