Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 293 (MAD)

Arumugam v. Veeradas

2013-01-10

G.RAJASURIA

body2013
Judgment :- 1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to get set aside the order dated 24.11.2010 passed in I.A.No.236 of 2009 in O.S.No.236 of 1986 by the I Additional District Munsif, Nagercoil. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned Counsel for the first respondent, who in unison, without any contradiction between themselves, would submit thus: (i) The parties entered into a compromise in the suit in O.S.No.236 of 1986 which was earlier decreed exparte. However, I.A.No.236 of 2009 was filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, to get the delay of 2111 days condoned in filing the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, but that application was dismissed. (ii) Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the same, this Civil Revision Petition has been filed on various grounds. (iii) Now then, in view of the compromise, this Court might allow the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and condone the delay of 2111 days in filing the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by allowing this Civil Revision Petition and mandating the trial Court to take up the application filed under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure and set aside the exparte decree and after bringing the suit on record, to proceed to record the compromise. 3. I could see considerable force in the submissions made by both the learned Counsel and accordingly, I would like to condone the delay of 2111 days in filing the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by allowing I.A.No.236 of 2009. The lower Court is mandated to number the application filed under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure and allow the same after hearing both sides. Whereupon, as per law, after recording the statements of both sides and marking the compromise memo, the same may be recorded if it is found to be genuine and free from doubt. 4. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of as above. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.