High Court set aside the impugned order condoning delay in a partition suit. The Court directed the trial court to refer the matter for mediation. If unresolved, the trial court must dispose of the application and trial within three months.
Impugned order set aside; matter remanded for mediation and subsequent trial within 3 months.
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. No.529 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.12.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
C.R.P.No.529 of 2019
and C.M.P.No.3472 of 2019
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Sec.115 of Civil Procedure Code, praying to set aside the fair order and decreetal order dated 1/6
C.R.P. No.529 of 2019
11.12.2018 in I.A.No. 28 of 2017 in O.S.No. 24 of 2012 on the file of the Addl. District Judge, Dharmapuri.
For Petitioners : Mr.R. Rajaramani For Respondent : Mr.A.Arun
O R D E R
Challenging the impugned order passed in I.A.No.28 of 2017 in O.S.No. 24 of 2012 by the Addl. District Judge, Dharmapuri, the defendants 1 to 4 and 6 have approached this court by filing this Civil Revision Petition.
2/6
C.R.P. No.529 of 2019
decree and they took steps to set aside the decree, but there was a delay of 761 days. Hence, they have filed an application in I.A.No.28 of 2017 under Sec.5 of Limitation Act praying to condone the delay. The reasons assigned for condonation of delay is that the 1st defendant, who aged about 80 years is looking after the case and he was not able to follow the case, due to old age and due to lack of communication. So, they were remained exparte and they were not negligent on their part. Hence, they filed the said application to condone the delay. The said application was strongly opposed by the plaintiff stating that only in order to drag on the proceedings, the 1st defendant not appeared even though he is hale and healthy, in fact, there is a criminal complaint arose between the parties in C.C.No. 38 of 2010, in which the 1st defendant used to appear before the criminal court and on the other hand, he gave false information that due to illness, he was not able to appear before this court, which is false one. Hence, he prayed to dismiss this Civil Revision Petition.
3/6
C.R.P. No.529 of 2019
advocate commissioner was also appointed, but the report was not filed. The learned counsel for Revision Petitioners argued that the 1st defendant is the father of plaintiff, aged about 80 years, not able to follow the proceedings due to illness and also due to lack of communication, they remained exparte, however, they have valid defence in the suit, since the suit properties are joint family properties and not an ancestral properties.
4/6
C.R.P. No.529 of 2019
to defend their case before the trial court. Accordingly, the findings rendered by the trial judge is liable to be set aside. However, though the counsel for respondent/plaintiff strongly raised objection, but as per the submissions before this court, this court is inclined to direct the trial court to refer the matter for mediation. So, the order passed by the trial court in the application in I.A.No. 28 of 2017 is set aside. After setting aside the order, the trial court may refer the matter for mediation before the Mediation Centre at Dharmapuri within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If the matter is not settled, the trial court is directed to dispose the application filed under Order 13 Rule 3 of C.P.C. on merits and to proceed with the trial and dispose the case within a period of three months thereafter. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is also closed.
02.12.2022 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Speaking/Non-speaking order rpp To Addl. District Judge, Dharmapuri
5/6
C.R.P. No.529 of 2019
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
rpp
C.R.P. No.529 of 2019
02.12.2022
6/6
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order condoning delay in filing a final decree application to set aside an ex-parte decree should be set aside.
Whether the trial court should be directed to refer the matter for mediation.
Whether the trial court should be directed to dispose of the application on merits and proceed with the trial within a fixed period.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Kuppusamy and others
Maruthalingam
T.V. Thamilselvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
