JANNATHUNISHA BEEVI Vs. ZAITHOON BEEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner / plaintiff filed O.S. No. 282 of 1995 for the relief of partition. Pending suit, the petitioner / plaintiff filed an amendment petition and the same was allowed. Since the petitioner / plaintiff has not taken steps to amend the plaint, the learned counsel reported no instructions and there was also no representation on behalf of the petitioner / plaintiff, the suit was dismissed for default on 12/11/2003. Since there was 366 days delay in filing a petition to set aside the dismissal order, the petitioner / plaintiff filed I.A. No. 67 of 2005. The Court below dismissed the same, against which, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner / plaintiff would submit that the petitioner / plaintiff was not in station at the time of dismissal of the suit. The counsel of the petitioner / plaintiff appeared before the Court below, was died and the same has not been informed to her till April, 2004. She has also suffered from Hepatitis - B. The case bundle also found out in the office of the counsel only during the month of November, 2004 and the present petition has been filed in the month of December, 2004. Hence, the delay has occurred. In a petition to condone the delay, the Court below ought to have taken a more sympathetic view, but has erroneously dismissed the same. Thus, he prayed to set aside the same.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 9 and 10 / defendants 9 and 10 would submit that the petitioner / plaintiff has not given proper explanation for the inordinate delay of 366 days and he has no interest in prosecuting the matter. The reasons assigned on the side of the petitioner / plaintiff are also not acceptable. Thus, he prayed to dismiss the revision petition.