2.The suit in O.S.No.30 of 2004 was laid by the first respondent for partition and separate possession of her 6/20th share in the suit properties. The petitioner, who had purchased a portion of the property in the year 1999 from one Subburaman, was impleaded as 34th defendant in the said suit. Since the petitioner did not file any written statement, he was set exparte and the suit came to be decreed on 03.01.2006. Subsequently, a final decree application has also been filed and the same was allowed on 26.09.2008 and a final decree came to be passed on the said date. The petitioner filed the application on 07.06.2011 seeking to condone the delay of 726 days in filing an application to set aside the exparte decree, dated 03.01.2006. In the affidavit filed in support of the application, it is claimed that the petitioner was never a resident of Puthukulam village and he never engaged a lawyer in the suit. According to him, the plaintiff/first respondent had purposely given a wrong address and wrong particulars regarding his community and created records to show that he has refused to receive the notice when it was sought to be served on him. He would also allege that he came to know about the exparte decree passed against him only on 07.11.2010 and hence, he has made out sufficient cause for condonation of delay.
