ALAGUMALAI Vs. KANNAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. The petitioner is the first defendant in O.S. No. 940 of 1995 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Vedasandur. The respondent filed the suit for partition. In the affidavit, the petitioner has affirmed that he appeared in the case through his Lawyer and the case was pending. In the mean while, due to the failure of monsoon and drought in his native place, he left his native place and went to Kerala to eke out his livelihood. He was residing in Kunnamkulam in Kerala doing coolie work. At that time, his son fell down from a tree and was admitted to the hospital and that since he was concentrating on that affair, he could not take care of the case. Further, he believed that his brother and sister, who were also defendants in the said suit would look after the case. It is alleged that the plaintiff has included the property separately purchased by this petitioner.

(2.) In the counter filed by the respondent herein, she has alleged that the reasons found in the affidavit are false. She obtained final decree, filed execution petition and took delivery of the properties also alloted to her and she is now in possession. Since the defendants had no case, they did not file any written statement denying her rights. It is false to allege that the petitioner had been in Kerala for five years. He was very much available in his native village by name P. Kosavapatty. Each and every delay should be explained for allowing the petition. The delay has not been satisfactorily explained before this Court and hence, this petition has to be dismissed.

(3.) The learned District Munsif and Judicial Magistrate after hearing both parties dismissed the petition. Hence, this petitioner is before this Court.