Sengodu v. Palanisamy
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner sought condonation of a 668-day delay in filing a second appeal in a suit concerning property/title disputes. The court allowed the petition, conditioning the relief on the payment of Rs. 4,000 towards the respondent's counsel fees.
What did the court decide?
Delay in filing second appeal condoned; petitioner to pay Rs. 4000 to respondent's counsel by 24.07.2024.
What the court decided
C.M.P. No. 7882 of 2024 in S.A.SR.No.43605 of 2024
C.M.P. No. 7882 of 2024 in S.A.SR.No.43605 of 2024
T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.
This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking to condone the delay of 668 days in filing the above Second Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 26.11.2020 passed in A.S.No.5 of 2019, on the file of II Addl. Sub-Court at Erode confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.4 of 2009 dated 10.08.2016 on the file of I Addl. District Munsif Court, Erode.
- Mr.K.Govi Ganesan, learned counsel for petitioners submitted that
the trial court counsel has not informed the disposal of the case, due to which, the above second appeal was not filed within a stipulated time. Hence, there is a delay of 668 days in filing the above second appeal arose, which is neither willful nor wanton. He would submit that they are having valid defence to contest the case. Therefore, he filed this petition to condone the delay in filing the above second appeal.
- Mr.A.M.Amutha Ganesh, learned counsel for respondents appeared and submitted that only under the guise of dragging on the proceedings, they have belatedly filed this petition without any valid reason. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.P. No. 7882 of 2024 in S.A.SR.No.43605 of 2024
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay of 668 days in filing the second appeal is condonable under the circumstances.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
T.V. Thamilselvi
- respondent
Respondents
Coram
T.V. Thamselvi
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court