V RAMESH Vs. G VENGAIVEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision Petition is directed against the orders of Courts below dismissing the Application filed under Order IX Rule 13 C. P. C to set aside the exparte Decree passed on 22. 06. 2000 in O. S. No. 2233 of 1995 on the file of XVI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. The Third Defendant is the Revision Petitioner.

(2.) FACTUAL background in brief is as follows:- The Plaintiff G. Govindaswamy is the owner of the Suit Property. Alleging that the Second Defendant Damodaran played trick on him and obtained a Power of Attorney empowering him to sell his Property and in pursuance of that the Second Defendant had sold the property to the Third Defendant, the Plaintiff has filed O. S. No. 2233 of 1995 on the file of City Civil Court, Chennai for Declaration that the said Document Power of Attorney is invalid and also for Permanent Injunction against the Defendants.

(3.) THE First Defendant remained exparte. Defendants 2 and 3 filed a Written Statement contesting the Suit. The case was posted in the Special List on 10. 01. 2000. The Plaintiff was examined as P. W. 1. The case was adjourned to various dates for cross-examination of P. W. 1 either at the request of the Revision Petitioner or since there was no representation on behalf of the Revision Petitioner. Finally, the case was adjourned to 22. 06. 2000 for cross-examination of P. W. 1. On 22. 06. 2000, the Plaintiff was present. Since there was no representation for the Revision Petitioner, the case was passed over upto 03. 50 p. m and since then, there was no representation for the Revision Petitioner. Hence, the Suit was decreed exparte.