V. SEENIRAJ Vs. PUSHPAM (DIED)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The civil revision petition is directed against the fair and decreetal orders, dtd. 30/1/2010, passed in I.A. No. 691 of 2009 in O.S. No. 435 of 2004, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sivakasi.

(2.) The suit has been laid by the petitioner / plaintiff for recovery of money based on the mortgage deed against the deceased defendant. It is found that the petitioner / plaintiff had failed to take appropriate steps to implead the legal representatives of the deceased defendant in time and thereby, the delay of 956 days having occurred in preferring the requisite application, to condone the delay, the petitioner / plaintiff has come forward with I.A. No. 691 of 2009. According to the petitioner / plaintiff, in respect of another proceeding between the parties, he had already taken appropriate steps to implead the legal representatives of the deceased defendant and he was under the impression that his counsel would have preferred necessary application to bring the legal representatives of the deceased defendant on record, however, only on the change of his counsel, he had come to know about the fact that the legal representatives of the deceased defendant had not been brought on record and hence, the delay had occurred and accordingly, sought for the condonation of the delay.

(3.) The respondents resisted the abovesaid application of the petitioner / plaintiff contending that they are noway connected with the suit proceedings and also challenged the averments made in the application as regards the delay as false and accordingly, prayed for the dismissal of the application.