Deivasigamani (Deceased) 1. Ramachandran v. Visalakshi Ammal

C.M.P.No. 13050 of 2025 and C.R.P.Sr.No. 54840 of 2025 P.B. BALAJI, J.

Despite service of notice and the names of the respondents having been printed in the cause list, there is no representation.

2. Heard Mr.Raja, learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner taking me through the averments in the affidavit would contend that the petitioners have made out sufficient cause for seeking condonation of delay of 270 days in preferring the revision.

4. I have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the counsel and have also gone through the averments in the affidavit filed in support of petition.

5. The petitioners have made out good ground for seeking condonation of delay. The reasons assigned by the petitioners in the affidavit filed in support of the application are sufficient to cover the entire delay of 270 days in preferring the revision and, therefore, I do not find any willful or malafide inaction on the part of the petitioners in approaching court.

6. This petition is ordered. Registry to number the petition, if it is otherwise in order.

25.09.2025 ssm https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

P.B. BALAJI, J.

ssm C.M.P.No. 13050 of 2025 and C.R.P.Sr.No. 54840 of 2025 25.09.2025 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis