JAWAHARI ANWAR ALI KHAN Vs. ABUBAKAR SITHICK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the fair and decreetal order dated 31.01.2017 passed in I.A.No.98 of 2012 in GWOP.No.2 of 2003 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Madurai, allowing the condone delay petition filed by the respondents to condone the inordinate and unexplained delay of 3024 days to set aside the ex parte order passed in G.W.O.P.No.2 of 2003 appointing the petitioners as joint guardians of the minor child Faheema Tahaseen.

(2.) The petitioners are husband and wife and the respondents are also husband and wife. The second respondent is the sister of first petitioner. The petitioners have no issues. Two female child and one male child were born to the respondents on 06.07.2001, 15.07.2002 and 25.02005 respectively. Thereafter, when the second respondent became pregnant, the respondents decided to abort it. The petitioners approached the respondents and undertook to take the child Faheema Tahaseen and the respondents also consented for it. The petitioners gave Rs.5,00,000/- and the respondents received it and the said female child was given in adoption in favour of the petitioners on 10.09.2002, in the presence of the both side relatives and accordingly, on 30.09.2002 an adoption document was executed between the parties. The petitioners are Government Employees and since they have to obtain Court order in order to make entry in respect of the child in their service register, they filed GWOP.No. 2 of 2003 and obtained ex parte order on 19.09.2003. Now, because of misunderstanding that arose between the parties with regard to immovable property worth about Rs.35,00,000/- the respondents have filed I.A.No.98 of 2012 to set aside the ex parte order passed in GWOP with false allegations.

(3.) The respondents have filed an application in I.A.No.98 of 2012 to condone the delay in filing the petition to set aside the ex parte order passed in the GWOP, contending that without the knowledge of the respondents, the petitioners had obtained an ex parte order against the child of the respondents. It is further stated that on 104.2011, the child of the respondents was confined in the petitioners' house and the petitioners did not allow the respondents to see their child and they intimidated the life of the child. Hence, the respondents filed HCP.No.816 of 2011 before this Court and this Court by order dated 25.11.2011 directed the respondents to seek remedy before the Court below. Thereafter, the respondents filed Interlocutory Application in I.A.No.98 of 2012 with delay and the said application was allowed. Against the said order, the petitioners have filed the present Civil Revision Petition.