M. SELVI Vs. RANGACHARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein is the defendant in O.S. No. 506 of 1991 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Salem. The said suit was filed by the respondent herein for specific performance of the suit agreement dated 10.1.1990.

(2.) The said suit was decreed ex parte on 20.8.1992. Subsequent to the ex parte decree, the petitioner filed I.A. No. 651 of 1994 on 14.2.1994 for setting aside the ex parte decree and I.A. No. 650 of 1994 for condoning the delay in filing the written statement. Both the applications were posted for hearing on 16.12.1994. On that day, since the petitioner did not appear, the applications were dismissed for default. On 12.1.1995, the petitioner filed applications I.A. Nos. 73 and 74 of 1995 for restoration of I.A. Nos. 650 and 651 of 1994 respectively. The lower court had dismissed both the applications. Hence C.R.P. No. 2224 of 1996 has been filed against the order in I.A. No. 73 of 1995, and C.R.P. No. 3075 of 1996 has been filed against the order in I.A. No. 74 of 1995.

(3.) Mr. R.M. Krishnaraju, the learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner had denied the execution of the suit agreement and further pleaded that the suit agreement is a fabricated one and the respondent has defrauded the petitioner. The petitioner was not in a position to attend the court on 16.12.1994 due to her illness and the medical certificate had been produced to the effect that she was admitted in the hospital on 13.12.1994 and she was discharged only on 22.12.1994 and as such her non -appearance on 16.12.1994 on medical grounds ought to have been accepted by the court below. The lower court is not correct in dismissing the applications on the ground that the doctor was not examined.