KAMALAMMAL AND OTHERS Vs. S. RAMESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition arises against the order and decree of the lower Court in I.A. No.25 of 2015 in O.S.No.25 of 2008 dated 11.09.2015 passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranipet, Vellore.

(2.) The respondent has filed a suit in O.S. No. 25 of 2008 for specific performance against the petitioners. Since the petitioners failed to appear on 01.04.2014, an ex-parte decree was passed by the court below. Against the same, the petitioners filed an application in I.A. No. 25 of 2015 to set aside the ex-parte decree. The court below dismissed the said application holding that the prosecution witnesses were not cross examined for more than 20 hearings. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the present application has been filed to condone the delay of 250 days in filing the application to set aside the ex-parte decree. If the said application is allowed, no prejudice would be caused to the respondent and hence the order of the court below is liable to be set aside.

(3.) The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that after framing of issues the matter was posted for trial. PW-1 proof affidavit was filed on 08.08.2013 and the case was posted for cross examination of PW-1 for more than 23 hearings. Hence, evidence of PW-1 was closed on 04.03.2014 and PW-2 proof affidavit was filed. Again PW-2 was not cross examined for several hearings and hence the ex-parte decree was passed on 01.04.2014. The learned counsel for the respondent further submitted that previously the petitioners filed I.A.No.35 of 2011 to set aside the ex-parte decree with a delay of 301 days and again the present application has been filed to condone the delay of 250 days. In the earlier occasion the condone delay application was allowed. Inspite of several opportunities given, the petitioners have not chosen to agitate the matter in the suit and only with an intention to drag on the suit proceedings, the petitioners have filed the present application. Therefore, the court below has rightly dismissed the present application filed by the petitioners and hence the revision petition is liable to be dismissed.