Annamalai v. Vijaya

C.M.P.No.7956 of 2017 in C.R.P.(PD).No.3159 of 2013 S.SOUNTHAR, J.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Substituted service has been effected on the respondents vide paper publication, proof to that effect is also filed and the names of the respondents are printed in the cause list . There is no representation for the respondents.

2. In support of the petition for restoration, the learned counsel on record had sworn an affidavit stating that on 28.03.2017, when he was on his way to the Court hall, the case was called and dismissed for non prosecution. The non appearance on that day by the counsel was neither willful nor wanton. The said averments is not controverted by the respondent.

3. Having satisfied with the reasons stated by the petitioner, the restoration petition is allowed and the Civil Revision Petition is restored to the file.

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

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

jai

4. Registry is directed to post the main Civil Revision Petition for hearing by next week.

08.04.2022 jai C.M.P.No.7956 of 2017 in C.R.P.(PD).No.3159 of 2013 2/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis