(1.) INVEIGHING the order dated 24.08.2007, passed by the Additional District Court (Fast Track Court), Namakkal, in I.A.No,68 of 2007 in O.S.No.188 of 2004, this civil revision petition is focussed.
(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner. Despite printing the name of the respondent, no one represents.
(3.) PERUSED the additional written statement. In my opinion, the additional written statement does not contain any antithetical stand with the stand already taken by the petitioner in the written statement. It is a trite proposition of law that while considering the application under Order 8 Rule 9 of CPC, the prayer of the defendant could be dealt with liberally, but not with same rigour as that expected to be applied for considering the prayer for amending the plaint. The observation made by the lower Court that there was delay in filing the application to some extent would weigh with the court as there should be no second thought over it. However, that could be compensated by awarding cost but the delay should not stand in the way of allowing I.A. Hence in these circumstances, the order of the lower Court is set aside by allowing this civil revision petition and the I.A.No,68 of 2007 shall stand allowed on cost of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) payable by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff within a period of 15 (fifteen) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which this order shall not enure to the benefit of the revision petitioner. Accordingly, this civil revision petition is allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.