PALANISAMY Vs. GOWRI TAMIL SELVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order passed in I.A.No.112 of 2006 in O.S.NO.920 of 2000 on the file of the II Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore, is under challenge in this revision. THE said application I.A.No.112 of 2006 was filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 by the defendants in O.S.No.920 of 2000 to condone the delay of 1312 days in filing a petition to set aside the exparte decree. THE reasoning stated in the affidavit to the petition to condone the delay is that in the suit the defendants have engaged one Mr.T.Chndra Mohan, advocate, at the first instance and subsequently on 05.06.2000 they have changed the advocate and one Mr.Sivaramakrishnan had filed change of vakalat, but he failed to file the written statement, which resulted in an exparte decree being passed on 6.9.20002 against the defendants.

(2.) IT is the case of the petitioners / defendants that in a similar occasion also the said advocate Mr.Sivaramakrishnan had failed to represent in O.S.No.375 of 1964, partition suit, an exparte decree has been passed against the same defendant only due to the latches on the part of the counsel Mr.Sivaramakrishnan and that they have preferred a complaint against Mr.Sivaramakrishnan, advocate, under Ex.P.2. But the learned Trial Judge had dismissed the application on the ground that no sufficient cause for the delay has been stated in the affidavit to the petition, which resulted in filing of this revision.