Application to condone a 292-day delay in seeking setting aside of an ex parte decree, attributed to omission of counsel's name from the cause list. Opposed by the fifth respondent. The court allowed the application on costs.
Delay of 292 days condoned; application allowed on payment of Rs.5000/- cost to the 5th respondent; matter posted to 20.11.2024.
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.
A.No.4833 of 2024 in C.S.No.609 of 2013
A.A.NAKKIRAN, J.
This application has been filed to pass an order condoning the delay of
292 days in filing the application to set aside the exparte decree dated 20.07.2023.
matter was listed on 11.02.2022 and 14.07.2022, on which date, this applicant
has been set exparte. Due to inadvertence of the Registry, the name of the applicant's counsel, has been omitted to be printed in the cause list due to which the said counsel was not appeared before this court and hence this court has set the applicant exparte. Finally the suit was decreed as prayed for by the plaintiff on 20.07.2023 and On knowing the said facts, the applicant has immediately filed an application to set aside the exparte decree. If the delay is not condoned,
the applicant would be put to irreparable injury. Therefore, he prays to allow this application.
A.A.NAKKIRAN, J.
gv stipulated time. He is prohibited in seeking another chance to participate in the proceedings only after the application to pass final decree is pending before this court. The delay of 331 days in filing this application has not been properly explained and the applicant was waiting for the preliminary decree to be passed, now has filed this application to set aside, very belatedly only with an intention to drag on the proceedings. The reason adduced, by the party for his non-appearance is not acceptable. He further submitted that even now the applicant has not filed his written statement with the application to condone the delay in filing the written statement. Hence, he prays to dismiss the application.
5. Heard both sides.
Gv
12.11.2024
A.No.4833 of 2024 in C.S.No.609 of 2013
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the 292-day delay in filing the application to set aside the ex parte decree should be condoned?
Applicant (4th defendant)
Respondents 1 to 3
5th respondent / 4th defendant
A.A.Nakkiran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
