P.Senthilmaran v. R.Dharani(Died), C.Saravanan (Died),1.R.Dharani
in A.S.SR.No.28838 of 2023 M.SUNDAR, J., and K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J., [Order of the Court was made by K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J.,] Read this in conjunction with and in continuation of earlier proceedings made in the previous listing on 26.02.2024 which reads as follows:
'C.M.P. No. 22433 of 2023 in A.S.SR. No.28838 of 2023 M.SUNDAR,J., and K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J., (Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.) Read this in conjunction with and in continuation of earlier proceedings made in the previous listing on 12.02.2024.
2. Today, Mr.P.Mani, learned counsel for petitioners/appellants is before us on video conferencing platform (to be noted, this is a hybrid hearing which is regular routine/daily feature in this Court) but there is no representation for respondents though one Mr.A.E.Kalaiselvan, learned counsel undertook to file vakalatnama for all the nine respondents. A scanned reproduction of the earlier proceedings dated 12.02.2024 is as follows:
Page Nos.1/6
Page Nos.2/6
Page Nos.3/6
3. With the intention of giving opportunity to the respondents and respondents' counsel, Registry to list this matter again a fortnight hence. Registry to also verify if any counsel has entered appearance on behalf of respondents 1 to 9.
4. List a fortnight hence. List on 11.03.2024.'
2. Captioned 'Civil Miscellaneous Petition' [hereinafter 'CMP' for the sake of convenience and clarity] is filed to condone the delay of 29 days in filing the above appeal suit in SR.No.28838 of 2023.
3. In the support affidavit, it is mentioned that the delay of 29 days in filing the above appeal occurred, since the case papers were misplaced by the Advocate clerk and therefore, the petitioner / appellant was unable to file the appeal in time.
4. Mr.P.Mani, learned counsel on record for petitioner / appellant would reiterate the same and also submitted that the delay is neither Page Nos.4/6
willful nor wanton and if the delay is not condoned the petitioner will be put to irreparable loss and hardship and hence, prays for allowing the CMP.
5. Despite notice, the respondents remained absent.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the explanation given by the petitioner in the support affidavit found to be sufficient, we are inclined to condone the delay.
7. Accordingly, CMP is ordered. Delay condoned. Registry is directed to number the appeal suit, if it is otherwise in order and list the same as per chronological order. There shall be no order as to costs. [M.S., J] [K.G.T., J] 11.03.2024 mk Page Nos.5/6
M.SUNDAR, J., and K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J., mk in A.S.SR.No.28838 of 2023 11.03.2024 Page Nos.6/6