LAWS(MAD)-2008-7-107

CHINNAPPAN Vs. VENUGOPAL

Decided On July 14, 2008
CHINNAPPAN Appellant
V/S
VENUGOPAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner / review petitioner, who would represent that there are some factual mistakes crept in the order passed by this Court in CRP.(NPD).No.585 of 2006. According to the learned counsel O.S.No.977 of 2005, a suit filed by the 2nd respondent, is not pending before the XII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, but before the IV Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, and that the said suit is for 131 1/3 sq. ft out of 6 cents in the suit survey number, whereas the suit filed by him / revision petitioner in O.S.No.1938 of 2001 is in respect of 1793 sq.ft out of 9 - cents in the same survey number property. Even if the suit filed by the defendant in O.S.No.977 of 2005 is pending before the IV Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, it is not going to affect the orders passed in CRP.(NPD).No.585 of 2006 on merits because the moot point that arose for consideration in CRP.(NPD).No.585 of 2006 was whether there was any acceptably reasoning given by the revision petitioner / plaintiff for condoning the delay of 612 days in filing an application to restore the suit O.S.No.1938 of 2001, which was dismissed for default on 24.06.2003. The learned trial judge has come to the conclusion that there was no sufficient reason to condone the delay of 612 day in filing an application to restore the suit in O.S.No.1938 of 2001 on file. Since there was no material placed before this court to condone the delay of 612 days in filing an application to restore the suit O.S.No.1938 of 2001, C.R.P.(NPD).No.585 of 2006 filed by the plaintiff against the order passed in I.A.No.8014 of 2005 in O.S.No.1983 of 2001 was also dismissed. Under such circumstance, I do not find any reason to review the order passed in C.R.P.(NPD).No.585 of 2001. With regard to extent of the property, if the revision petitioner has got any grievance he can went out the same in O.S.No.977 of 2005 pending before the City Civil Court, Chennai. In fine, the review application is dismissed. No costs.