KAMALA Vs. LAKSHMIAMMAL AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By consent of both the counsel, the civil revision petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) The petitioner is the defendant in O.S. No. 314 of 1991 on the file of the District Munsif, Tiruchengode. The respondents herein filed the said suit seeking a decree of permanent injunction restraining the petitioner herein from interfering with his possession of the suit property. Pending the suit, he also filed art application for interim injunction and the said application was dismissed. Against the same the respondents have filed an appeal C.M.A. No. 22 of 1995 on the file of the Sub Court, Sankari. The appeal was posted on 18.12.1995. As the Advocates boycotted the court and the respondents also did not appear, the appeal was dismissed for default. The respondents filed an application I.A. No. 7 of 1996 for restoration of the appeal, which was ordered on 8.3.1996. As against this, the petitioner has filed this revision.

(3.) Counsel for the respondent contended that the Advocates have boycotted the court and as such the litigant public should not be made to suffer due to the conduct of the Advocates. The respondents did not appear in the court thinking that their presence is not necessary. The lower court had exercised its discretionary power in a judicious manner and as there is no error of jurisdiction, the order of the court below need not be interfered with.