A AHAMMED GANI Vs. COMMISSIONER, RAMANATHAPURAM MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner/defendant against the order dated 4.8.2008 passed by the learned Sub Judge, Ramanathapuram in IA. No. 43/2006 in OS. No. 24/2004, condoning the delay of 351 days in filing the petition to restore the suit, which was dismissed for default on 1.11.2004.

(2.) The respondent/plaintiff has filed the above said suit against the petitioner for recovery of arrears of lease amount of Rs. 3,85,030/- and the suit was dismissed for default on 1.11.2004. Originally the suit was posted on 8.11.2004 and the same was advanced to 1.11.2004 and posted in the special list on that date. It was submitted by the respondent that they failed to note down the date when it was advanced and posted in the list and as it was not called on 8.11.2004 the suit bundle was kept separately by the counsel in his office and the same has got mixed up with the disposed bundles. Only when the officials of the respondent Municipality approached the petitioner demanding the arrears of lease amount, they came to know about the dismissal of the suit and thereafter, the suit bundles were traced and the petition was filed to restore the suit which was dismissed for default. According to the respondent, it has resulted in a delay of 351 days. The trial court on being satisfied with the reasons shown by the respondent allowed the application. Aggrieved against the said order, this Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the defendant.

(3.) Mr. V. Raghavachari, the learned Counsel for the petitioner assailed the impugned order on the ground that the petitioner is greatly prejudiced on the delay being condoned and he would submit that the court below failed to see that the respondent was not diligent enough and further there was no sufficient cause shown for condoning the delay.