Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 501 (MAD)

Karuppaiah v. Neelakandan

2013-01-23

G.RAJASURIA

body2013
JUDGMENT 1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to get set aside the order dated 03.02.2012 passed in I.A.No.454 of 2011 in M.C.O.P.No.88 of 2004 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Pudukottai. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner. 3. The learned Counsel for the revision petitioner would echo the cri de coeur and heart burns of his client to the effect that the lower Court in the impugned order dated 03.02.2012 imposed a huge cost of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand Only) as a condition precedent for condoning the delay of 539 days in filing the application to get the exparte award set aside. Hence, he would pray for setting aside the order of the lower Court. 4. I have perused the records. 5. The lower Court in its detailed order, taking into account the pros and cons and also the previous conduct of the petitioner in filing one another petition in prosecuting the same relief etc., in the interest of justice, allowed the petition subject to the said condition imposing a cost of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand Only), which in my opinion can never be taken an exorbitant or injudicious one and hence, no interference is required in this Civil Revision Petition. 6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. 7. On hearing the pronouncement of the order, the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner would make an extempore submission that in view of the order passed by this Court, sufficient time may be granted for the petitioner to pay the costs awarded by the lower Court. Accordingly, time is granted to pay the costs on or before 31.01.2013 as per the order of the lower Court.