KALIAPERUMAL Vs. PARASURAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner/petitioner/defendant has filed this civil revision petition as against the order dated 21.7.2009 in I.A.No,737 of 2007 in O.S.No,341 of 1994 passed by the learned District Munsif, Panruti in dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under Section 5 of Limitation Act praying to condone the delay of 3351 days in filing the application to set aside the exparte decree dated 5.11.1998.

(2.) TO avoid an avoidable delay, this Court in the interest of justice dispenses with the issuance of the notice to the respondent.

(3.) BEFORE the trial Court, the revision petitioner in his affidavit in I.A.No,737 of 2007 has inter alia averred that he has engaged Thiru.G.Gunalan, Advocate to contest his case and his previous counsel assured him that "he will write a letter to him at the time of trial," but till this date no letter has been served on him from previous counsel and on 28.3.2007 the court notice has been served on him in connection with the Execution case and the matter has been posted for hearing on 30.3.2007 in E.P.No.11 of 2007 and only then he has come to know that an exparte decree has been passed against him in the main suit in O.S.No,341 of 1994 on 05.1.1998 and it is the mistake of his previous counsel in not informing the date of trial to him and for the mistake of an Advocate a party should not suffer and it is the principle of law and in that process, there has occasioned the delay of 3351 days in preferring the application to set aside the exparte decree passed against him on 05.1.1998 and the said delay is neither wilful nor wanton but it is due to the mistake of his previous counsel and therefore has prayed for allowing the condonation of delay appliaction.