Madras High Court
CRP/3692/2023 of A.MADESHWARI Vs A.S.RAMASAMY on 6 October 2026
CRP.No.3692 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR
CRP.No.3692 of 2023
CNR:{HCMA011787682023}
A.Madeshwari
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
A.S.Ramasamy
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code, to set aside the order dated 22.06.2023 made in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in O.S.No.344 of 2011 by the 1st Additional District Munsif, Salem.
For Petitioner
: Mr.T.S.Vijaya Raghavan
For Respondent
: Mr.S.Ramesh Kumar
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
This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the 1st Additional District Munsif, Salem in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in O.S.No.344 of 2011, dated 22.06.2023, dismissing the application filed by the petitioner seeking to condone the delay of 1879 days in filing petition to restore the suit, which was dismissed for default on 13.07.2016.
CRP.No.3692 of 2023
2. The petitioner herein filed a suit seeking permanent injunction as against the respondent and the same was dismissed for default on 13.07.2016. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application to restore the suit along with a petition to condone the delay of 1879 days in filing the restoration application. These applications were filed on 06.09.2021. By the impugned order, the Trial Court dismissed the condone delay petition and aggrieved by the same, the petitioner/plaintiff has come before this Court.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that at the relevant point of time, the petitioner was suffering from jaundice and hence, she could not attend the Court and contact her counsel. Immediately, after acquiring knowledge about the dismissal of the suit for default, the petitioner contacted her counsel and filed the instant application to restore the suit along with the condone delay petition.
4. In the affidavit filed in support of the condone delay petition, the petitioner simply averred that at the relevant point of time, she was suffering from jaundice and hence, she could not contact her counsel and instruct him suitably. The suit was dismissed for default on 13.07.2016. The instant application has been filed nearly after five years only on 06.09.2021. The vague
CRP.No.3692 of 2023
allegation made by the petitioner in the affidavit regarding her illness without any supporting documents cannot constitute sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay of 1879 days. The Trial Court rightly appreciated the same and dismissed the application. I do not find any error in the impugned order.
5. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. 06-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No dm To The 1st Additional District Munsif, Salem.
CRP.No.3692 of 2023
S.SOUNTHAR J. dm CRP.No.3692 of 2023 06-10-2026