PALAIAMMAL MINOR Vs. PICHIYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - By consent of both the counsel the Civil Revision Petition itself is taken up for final disposal since notice of motion was ordered.

(2.) The petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 595 of 1993 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Pattukkottai. The said suit was dismissed for default on 6.6.1995.The petitioner filed an application L.A. No. 891 of 1995 for condoning the delay of 15 days in filing the application for restoration of the suit. The said application was dismissed by the Trial Court. As against the said order the present revision has been filed.

(3.) It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the. petitioner could not attend the court on the date of the hearing. Further she was admitted in the hospital for heart attack and she was treated as an in patient for twenty, days and Doctor has advised her complete bed rest for another twenty days and hence she could not meet her counsel and after she recovered from the illness, she filed the application. The trial Court has dismissed the application on the ground that the Doctor has not been examined to prove the Medical Certificate. He also relied upon the judgment reported in T. Lakshmiammal & Anr. v. Jothi Anandan, to contend that the Doctor need not be examined especially. when the petitioner had gone into the Box.