C.Prakash v. S.C.Renu Gounder

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.06.2022 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA C.R.P.(PD).No.1074 of 2022 and C.M.P.No.5507 of 2022 C.Prakash ... Petitioner ..Vs..

S.C.Renu Gounder ... Respondent Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 11.02.2022 made in I.A.No.01 of 2020 in O.S.No.55 of 2017 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Ranipet, Vellore District. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Bharanichandrar For Respondents : Ms.V.Ananthi for Mr.K.Mohanamurali Page No.1/5

O R D E R

This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred challenging the order dated 11.02.2022 made in I.A.No.01 of 2020 in O.S.No.55 of 2017 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Ranipet, Vellore District.

2. The revision petitioner is the defendant in the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff in O.S.No.55 of 2017 for the relief of specific performance and the same was decreed ex parte. Thereafter, the revision petitioner had chosen to file a petition to set aside the ex parte decree along with the petition to condone the delay of 1028 days and the same was dismissed. Aggrieved over that this revision petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the delay was not wanton and the delay was caused only because the revision petitioner was suffering from some health issues and that the learned trial Judge has taken a pedantic approach and dismissed the petition.

4. It is true that in the petitions filed to condone the delay, liberal Page No.2/5

view should be taken provided the reasons stated by the petitioner is prima facie acceptable. The petitioner herein has stated that he was suffering from jaundice and diabetes and that is the reason why he could not meet his counsel. It is difficult to believe that the petitioner was suffering from jaundice and diabetes in a way that he could not even go and meet his counsel for three years. The reasons so stated by the petitioner was also not substantiated before the Court.

5. Under such circumstances, the trial Court cannot be expected to take favourable view and allow the petition to condone the delay. The conduct of the petitioner only shows his lethargic attitude and delay making tactics. Since no acceptable reasons is proved before the Court for condoning the delay, the trial Judge had rightly dismissed the petition, I find no ground for interference.

6. Hence, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed and the order dated 11.02.2022 made in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in O.S.No.55 of 2017 passed Page No.3/5

by the learned Sub Judge, Ranipet, Vellore is hereby confirmed. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 21.06.2022 Index:Yes No Speaking Order:Yes/No ms To 1.The Subordinate Judge, Ranipet, Vellore District.

2.The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.

Page No.4/5

R.N.MANJULA, J.

ms C.R.P.(PD).No.1074 of 2022 and C.M.P.No.5507 of 2022 21.06.2022 Page No.5/5