(1.) M.P.No,2 of 2009 has been filed to condone the delay of 561 days in filing the Appeal against the judgment and decree of the Additional District Court (Fast Track Court-I) at Salem, dated 18.2.2008 in O.S.No.13 of 2004.
(2.) THIS Application is opposed at the instance of Respondents 1 and 2 the First Respondent is a minor, who is represented by his Mother and next friend, the Second Respondent. Respondents 1 and 2 filed a Suit for Partition in the year 1994 in O.S.No,312 of 1995, which came to be transferred to the file of the Additional District Judge, where it was re-numbered as O.S.No.13 of 2004. The Suit was for Partition as against the husband and her mother-in-law, who were arrayed as Defendants 1 and 2 in the Suit and who are no more as on date. In fact, prior to the filing of the partition Suit, the husband of the First Respondent filed H.M.O.P.No,38 of 1994 for divorce, which was dismissed, while the Second Respondent-s Petition in F.C.O.P.No,268 of 1996 for restitution of conjugal rights was allowed. The maintenance ordered in the said Proceedings was also due and payable to the First and Second Respondent herein. Though the Suit came to be dismissed for default on 24.2.2003, the same was restored to file on 15.12.2003 and necessary Applications were filed by Respondents 1 and 2.
(3.) IN such circumstances, we are of the considered view that interest of justice can be subserved by imposing some stringent conditions for condoning the delay of 561 days in filing this Appeal, so that the First and Second Respondent can at least be provided with some monetary benefits to keep their heart and soul together. The First Respondent being minor, his education expenses have also to be made by the Second Respondent-window. Since substantial rights are involved we are convinced that there is some explanation offered by the Petitioner for the delay involved, the delay can be condoned by imposing some stringent conditions.