Madras High Court
CRP/3896/2023 of Muniyammal Vs Chellamuthu on 15 October 2026
CRP.No.3896 of 2023
__________
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 15-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR
CRP.No.3896 of 2023
CNR:{HCMA011839232023}
1. Muniyammal
2. Chinnappan
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
Chellamuthu
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order passed by the Subordinate Judge at Mettur dated 03.02.2023 in I.A.No.1 of 2012 in O.S.No.265 of 2020.
For Petitioners
: Mr.C.Deepakkumar
For Respondent
: Mr.M.R.Jothimanian
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Trial Court dismissing the application filed by the petitioners seeking to condone the delay of 323 days in filing the petition to set aside the exparte decree.
( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 05:04:45 pm )
CRP.No.3896 of 2023 __________
2. The respondent herein filed a suit for Specific Performance against the petitioners and obtained an exparte decree on 30.04.2021. The petitioners filed application to set aside the exparte decree along with the petition to condone the delay of 323 days in filing such application. The said application was filed on 18.04.2022. The Trial Court by impugned order dismissed the condone delay petition and aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have come before this Court.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that after receipt of suit summons, there was a compromise between the petitioners and respondent. The petitioners bonafidely believed that based on the compromise the respondent would withdraw the suit and hence, failed to contest the same. Immediately after acquiring knowledge about the exparte decree, they have been constrained to file a petition to set aside the exparte decree with delay.
4. It is seen from the typed-set of papers that notice in the suit was served on the petitioners during January-2021 and they failed to appear before the Court on 21.12.2021. Hence, they were set exparte and ultimately, the exparte decree was passed. Subsequently, the exparte decree was put into execution and
( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 05:04:45 pm )
CRP.No.3896 of 2023 __________
inspite of service of notice on the petitioners in execution petition, they failed to appear before the Court and hence, final orders were passed in the execution petition and Sale Deed was executed pursuant to the exparte decree. The instant application has been filed by the petitioners when draft Sale Deed has been filed before the Executing Court.
5. Even though the petitioners pleaded that there was a compromise between the parties and petitioners bonafidely believed that the respondent would act in accordance with compromise and withdraw the suit, the petitioners have not produced any material to substantiate the claim that there was a compromise. The petitioners for the reasons known to them have not examined the person, who mediated the compromise. Even the petitioners have not entered the box to assert the averment made in the affidavit.
6. In absence of any evidence to show that really there was a compromise between the parties and petitioners bonafidely believed the respondent would withdraw the suit, the vague reason given by the petitioners cannot be accepted by this Court. It is also seen that even after receipt of notice in execution petition, the petitioners failed to appear before the Court below. Hence, the Trial Court rightly refused to exercise its discretion in favour of the petitioners and
( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 05:04:45 pm )
CRP.No.3896 of 2023 __________
dismissed the condone delay petition. I do not find any error in the impugned order.
7. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. 15-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No dm
( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 05:04:45 pm )
CRP.No.3896 of 2023 __________
To The Subordinate Court, Mettur.
( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 05:04:45 pm )
CRP.No.3896 of 2023 __________
S.SOUNTHAR J. dm CRP.No.3896 of 2023 15-10-2026
( Uploaded on: 26/10/2026 05:04:45 pm )