future maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,000/- each from the date of suit, that is 24.3.2001 and arrears of maintenance at the same rate for three years prior to the filing of the suit and the first plaintiff was permitted to withdraw the amount. The Court below also granted a decree for Rs.1,50,000/-being the value of gold ornaments and the amount entrusted with the defendant from his assets and also directed the appellant herein to redeliver the property covered by settlement deed dated 7.5.1996 of Maaranallur SRO on executing a release deed in favour of the first plaintiff within three months. The other claims were rejected by the Court below. The decree was passed on 30.6.2004. According to the appellant, during the proceedings in OP No.808/1999, there was a settlement and on the basis of the settlement, both the parties agreed to withdraw all the proceedings. So he was under the impression that the suit was also withdrawn by the respondent herein. Only on 18.2.2006 when he received notice in OP.No.27/2006, a divorce petition filed by the respondent, he came to know about the disposal of the case. Though execution petition was filed as EP.No.37/2005, he did not receive notice from the Court till he filed the applications. So there was no willful laches on his part and he prayed for setting aside the ex parte decree after condoning a delay of 902 days by filing IA.Nos. 425/2009 and 426/2009 respectively.
