Mohammed Raffique v. Mohammed Ali

C.M.P.No.22215 of 2019 in S.A.SR.No.89442 of 2019 (Filing Number) M.SUNDAR, J Read this in conjunction with and in continuation of earlier proceedings made by Hon'ble Predecessor Judge on 25.10.2019.

2. Captioned CMP is one for condonation of delay (COD) in filing captioned Second Appeal.

3. In continuation of aforementioned earlier proceedings Mr.Jeremiah Gregory John, learned counsel for petitioners submits that sole respondent has since been duly served and his name is also shown in the cause list. To be noted, name of sole respondent together with full/complete address is shown in the cause list. This Court is informed that no counsel has entered appearance on behalf of sole respondent though notice has been served. Therefore, the sole respondent has not come forward to oppose this COD application in spite of notice being served.

1/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

M.SUNDAR, J mk

4. Be that as it may, this Court heard the learned counsel for petitioners, perused the affidavit filed in support of COD application and it finds that the lapse in communication between the counsel in District Court and High Court is primarily the reason for the short delay that is sought to be condoned in captioned COD CMP. This is reiterated by learned counsel for petitioners in this Virtual hearing. Owing to these aspects, this Court is convinced that COD prayer deserves to be acceded to.

5. In the light of the narrative thus far, captioned CMP is ordered as prayed for. There shall be no order as to costs. 28.06.2021 mk C.M.P.No.22215 of 2019 in S.A.SR.No.89442 of 2019 2/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/