RAKKEEYA GOUNDER Vs. KAMALAMBAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE civil revision petitioners/defendants 1 and 2 have projected this civil revision petition as against the order dated 31.01.2008 in I.A.No.20 of 2008 in O.S.No.98 of 2003 passed by the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Paramathi, in dismissing the application filed by the revision petitioners/defendants 1 and 2 under Order 8 Rule 9 C.P.C., (praying the Trial Court to receive the subsequent pleading after condoning the delay.)

(2.) THE Trial Court while passing orders in I.A.No.20 of 2008 has inter alia observed that already the revision petitioners/defendants 1 and 2 have filed the written statement on 12.01.2004, wherein, they have stated in detail about the facts of the matter which they have mentioned in the present I.A.No.20 of 2008 and has resultantly dismissed the application. Moreover, the Trial Court has also observed that by cross examining P.W.1, there is possibility on the side of defendants to explain the averments mentioned in the additional/subsequent written statement.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondent supported the Trial Court order and prays this Court that the Trial Court has exercised its discretion in a proper and equitable way and therefore, this Court sitting in revision at this stage need not interfere with the order passed by the Trial Court.