RAMESH Vs. RAMULU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant in O.S.No.420 of 2009 on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Thiruvannamalai, is the petitioner herein.

(2.) Before the trial Court the respondent in this Civil Revision Petition, filed a suit for the relief of direction, directing the defendant/revision petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- together with subsequent interest from the date of plaint at 12% per annum and also cost of the suit.

(3.) Before the trial court, the suit was decreed on 18.02.2010 and immediately thereafter, the respondent/plaintiff filed an Execution Petition in E.P. No.36 of 2011 for realising the decreed amount. In the EP proceedings, the property of the petitioner/defendant was brought for sale on 03.08.2011. Only in the said circumstance, the petitioner/defendant has approached the Additional District Munsif of Tiruvannamali with a prayer to condone the delay of 687 days in presenting the application to set aside the exparte decree. The learned Additional District Munsif, Tiruvannamalai, after affording an opportunity to the respondent herein, by order dated 26.06.2012, dismissed the application filed by the petitioner. In the impugned order, the learned Additional District Munsif, Tiruvannamalai, has categorically mentioned that as the summons issued to the petitioner/defendant was served on his father, the service of summons in respect of the petitioner/defendant was held sufficient, and further held that the reason stated by the petitioner that he has not been served with the summons is unbelievable and hence, the petitioner/defendnat is not entitled for the relief as prayed in the petition.