P KRISHNAMMAL Vs. M RAJESWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioners/defendants 1 and 2 have projected this revision petition aggrieved against the order passed in I.A.No.521 of 2007 in O.S.No. 90 of 2006 dated 12.3.2008 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Mettur in dismissing the application filed under Order 9 Rule 7 of CPC.

(2.) THE trial Court while passing an order in I.A.No.521 of 2007 in O.S.No.90 of 2006 has come to the conclusion to the effect that ' even though the suit summons was served on 7.1.2007 itself, from Ex A1 and A2, it is clear that this petitioners have applied for registration copies only on 1.8.2007 ie., long after passing of the exparte order ie., 7.3.2007. So the reason assigned for not filing the written statement on 7.3.2007 is also not acceptable. Hence no merits in the said application and resultantly has dismissed the application.

(3.) THE respondent/plaintiff in her counter has inter alia averred that the application is not maintainable and it is not correct to say that the revision petitioners/ defendants have traced out the documents which are relevant to prepare the written statement from some other places and in the petitioners' house and that there is no valid reason assigned in the affidavit to set aside the exparte order and that the petitioners have approached this Court with uncleaned hands and they have violated the principles of law and mandatory provisions of CPC etc., and therefore has prayed for dismissal of the petition.