M PALANISAMY Vs. PREMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, against the order and decretal order dated 13.7.2007 in I.A.No.1306 of 2005 in A.S.No. /2005 in C.F.R.No,22187 of 2005 in O.S.No.1941 of 1997 on the file of the Principal District Court, Coimbatore.) The revision petitioner/2nd defendant has filed this present civil revision petition as against the order dated 13.7.2007 in I.A.No.1306 of 2005 of 2006 in A.S.No. /2005 in C.R.F.No,22187 of 2005 in O.S.No.1941 of 1997 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Coimbatore in dismissing the application filed by the revision petitioner/second defendant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying to condone the delay of 721 days in preferring an appeal.

(2.) THE trial Court, while passing orders in I.A.No.1306/2005 has among other things observed that the revision petitioner has not assigned proper reason or explanation as to what date the alleged family arrangement has taken place and why the same has not been put into writing and further that before and after the issuance of Ex R1 notice, on what date, the purported family arrangement has been made has not been given in detail by the revision petitioner and therefore the factum of the said family arrangement has not been established and the revision petitioner has taken part in the proceedings of the final decree in I.A.No,737 of 2004 and after a lapse of one year has filed this present I.A.No.1306 of 2005 and more over, the revision petitioner has not explained each and every day delay and he has not given sufficient cause or explanation as to the said delay on 721 days and resultantly dismissed the application without costs.

(3.) THIS Court has paid its anxious consideration to the arguments advanced on either sides and noticed the contentions of the learned counsel for the respective parties.