The Madras High Court dismissed a civil revision petition challenging an order dismissing a petition to set aside an ex-parte decree for non-performance of an agreement to sell. The court found no infirmity in the lower court's judgment, noting the petitioner failed to justify the delay and the suit property was already sold and possession delivered.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C.R.P.(N.P.D).No.3915 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
C.R.P.(NPD) No.3915 of 2018
and
CMP No.21715 of 2018
S. Latha ... Petitioner
Vs
S. Kamala ... Respondent
Prayer :- Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 27.02.2018 made in CMA No.7 of 2017 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Vellore, confirming the fair and decreetal order dated 22.09.2017 made in I.A.No.454 of 2016 in O.S.No.5 of 2015 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Vellore.
For Petitioner : Mr.PA. Sudesh Kumar For Respondent : Mr.P.Mani
ORDER This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the Judgment and
Decree dated 27.02.2018 made in CMA No.7 of 2017 on the file of the
Principal District Judge, Vellore, confirming the fair and decreetal order
dated 22.09.2017 made in I.A.No.454 of 2016 in O.S.No.5 of 2015 on
1/4
C.R.P.(N.P.D).No.3915 of 2018
the file of the Subordinate Judge, Vellore, thereby confirming the order passed by the Trial Court, thereby dismissing the petition to set aside the ex-parte decree.
plaintiff. The respondent filed a suit for specific performance on the strength of the agreement for sale dated 21.12.2011. Since, the petitioner failed to perform his contract, the respondent filed a suit for specific performance. On receipt of the suit summons, the petitioner failed to appear before the Trial Court and as such he was set ex-parte and ex-parte decree was passed on 16.03.2015. On the strength of the ex-parte decree, the respondent filed an Execution Petition in E.P.No.26 of 2015 and in the Execution Petition, the petitioner was also duly served notice. After receiving summon in the execution proceedings, in which,
he also failed to appear before the Execution Court and he was set
ex-parte. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a petition to set aside the ex-parte decree with a delay of 300 days in filing the petition to set aside the ex-parte decree.
aside the ex-parte decree shows that the respondent was served, the
respondent called absent and was set ex-parte by an order dated https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 2/4
C.R.P.(N.P.D).No.3915 of 2018
17.10.2016. Thereafter, in setting aside the ex-parte decree, the
respondent filed a counter.
08.07.2021
lpp
Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No
3/4
C.R.P.(N.P.D).No.3915 of 2018
lpp
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.
To
1.The Principal District Judge, Vellore.
2.The Subordinate Judge,
Vellore.
C.R.P.(NPD) No.3915 of 2018
and CMP No.21715 of 2018
08.07.2021
4/4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court finds any infirmity or illegality in the lower court's order dismissing the petition to set aside an ex-parte decree.
Whether the petitioner's claimed illness constituted sufficient justification for condoning the massive delay in filing the petition to set aside the ex-parte decree.
S. Latha
S. Kamala
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
