K R CHINNATHAMBI GOUNDER Vs. BHANUMATHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the second defendant.

(2.) THE plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.846 of 1990 against the Commissioner, Mugaiyur Panchayat Union as first defendant and the President, Kottamarudhur Panchayat Board as second defendant, the petitioner herein, praying for declaration and permanent injunction. When the matter was posted for filing of written statement on 26.2.1992, the petitioner was not present in the court when called and hence, he was set ex parte. THEn, the suit was proceeded in respect of the first defendant alone. On 14.8.1997 the petitioner filed an application in I.A.No.618 of 1997 for setting aside the ex parte order.

(3.) IN this application there is no sufficient cause given as to why such an inordinate delay was caused. It is also to be noted that subsequent to the ex parte order passed on 26.2.1992, all the witnesses have been examined on behalf of the plaintiff and D.W. 1 was also examined on behalf of the first defendant. Now, the matter has been posted for examining the other witnesses on behalf of the first defendant. At this stage, according to the counsel for the respondents, this application has been filed in order to drag on the proceedings further. IN order to support her submission, the learned counsel cited the decision in Deo Nand v. Achaiber Misir, A.I.R. 1954 All. 361.