(1.) The Civil Revision Petition is filed against the fair and decretal order dated 23.07.2014 made in C.M.P.No.926 of 2012 in A.S.SR.No.39022 of 2011 on the file of the Principal City Civil Court, Chennai.
(2.) The petitioners 1 to 4 are defendants 7 to 10, petitioners 5 to 7 are the legal heirs of the 6th defendant, respondents 1 to 6 are the plaintiffs and respondents 7 and 8 are defendants 2 and 5 in O.S.No.12665 of 1996 on the file of the V Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai. The respondents 1 to 6 filed the said suit for partition of the suit property claiming ? .. "rd share. They initially filed suit against one Velayutham (since deceased), Mani and Danabhakiyam. The respondents 1 to 6 are the legal heirs of one T.Sivanesan, who is second son of one Thiruvaimozhi. First defendant/T.Velayutham is first son and third defendant/Danabakkiyam is wife of the said Thiruvaimozhi. The second defendant Mani is son of first defendant/T.Velayutham. The suit property belonged to Thiruvaimozhi. The petitioners 1 to 4 and mother of the petitioners 5 to 7 are the daughters of Thiruvaimozhi. The mother of the petitioners 1 to 4 viz., Danabhakiyam was impleaded as party defendant initially in the suit. Pending suit, Danabhakiyam, wife of Thiruvaimozhi died. After the death of their mother Danabhakiyam, the petitioners 1 to 4, mother of the petitioners 5 to 7, one Sakunthala, wife of Velayutham/first defendant and Deivanayagi, daughter of Velayutham, were impleaded as party defendants 4 to 10.
(3.) According to the petitioners 1 to 4, notice in the impleading petition was not served on them. An exparte order was passed. After impleading them, no suit summon was served on them. They came to know about the same, when the publication was effected in Makkal Kural newspaper in final decree application. They filed I.A.No.20788 of 2008 to set aside the exparte preliminary decree dated 07.01.2004. The said application was dismissed on 02.02.2010 on the ground that the preliminary decree was passed on merits after contest. The respondents 7 and 8 and one Sakunthala filed A.S.No.381 of 2004 against the preliminary decree and the same was dismissed confirming the preliminary decree passed in O.S.No.12665 of 1996 dated 07.01.2004 and rights of the petitioners are not affected by the preliminary decree. The petitioners filed the Civil Revision Petition challenging the said judgment and decree dated 15.09.2006 made in A.S.No.381 of 2004. The said Civil Revision Petition was not proceeded with subsequently. After that, the petitioners herein filed appeal along with the present petition C.M.P.No.926 of 2012 for condonation of delay of 2754 days in filing appeal against the preliminary decree dated 07.01.2004 made in O.S.No.12665 of 1996.