Madras High Court
CRP/4862/2026 of Froq Far East Brand Services Pvt. Ltd Vs Pemela on 30 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 30-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
Civil Revision Petition No.4862 of 2026
and
C.M.P.No.21241 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA011635712026}
M/s.Froq Far East Brand Services Pvt. Ltd., represented by its Power of Attorney-cum- Studio Cordinator, Mr.Regan Raj, having address at 310, Alpha Wing, Rehaja Towers, No.177, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.
..Petitioner
Vs
Pemela
W/o.Late.Chrisantha Jac Raj
..Respondent
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the order dated 26.03.2026 in I.A.No.4 of 2025 in O.S.No.4413 of 2025 on the file of III Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.
For Petitioner :
Mr.M.Velan
For Respondent :
Mr.N.Moorthi
*****
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 has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order passed in I.A.No.4 of 2025 in
O.S.No.4413 of 2025 dated 26.03.2026, wherein the application filed by the respondent/defendant under IX Rule 7 CPC to set aside the ex parte order dated 19.09.2025, came to be allowed by the Court below.
2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondent and carefully perused the materials available on record. This Court also went through the impugned order.
3. The petitioner is the plaintiff, who filed the summary suit in O.S.No.4413 of 2025 for recovery of money against the respondent/defendant. The suit was filed in the year 2025 and the respondent/defendant entered appearance through counsel on 28.08.2025 and the vakalath was filed. The summons for judgment was served on the respondent/defendant on 09.09.2025 and within ten days, the respondent/defendant is mandated to file an application seeking leave to defend and this period expires on 19.09.2025. No application seeking leave to defend was filed till 19.09.2025 and on the same day, the respondent/defendant was set ex parte and the matter was posted on 22.09.2025 for examining the petitioner/plaintiff and for marking of documents and this process was completed on that day. The matter was posted for judgment on 08.10.2025.
4. The respondent/defendant has filed the application in I.A.No.4 of 2025 in O.S.No.4413 of 2025 under IX Rule 7 CPC to set aside the ex parte order dated 19.09.2025 on 25.09.2025. Learned counsel for respondent/defendant submitted that on the very same day, the application seeking leave to defend was also filed. The Court below has allowed the application by imposing cost of Rs.3,000/- payable by the respondent/defendant to the petitioner/plaintiff.
5. The Court below failed to take note of the fact that the ten days period for filing the application seeking leave to defend expired on 19.09.2025 and if the said application is filed thereafter, it has to be accompanied with an application to condone the delay in filing the application. Such an application has not been filed by the respondent/defendant. Straight away, the Court below has entertained the application filed by the respondent/defendant seeking leave to defend in I.A.No.6 of 2025 in O.S.No.4413 of 2025, which is now pending before the trial Court and it is posted for filing of counter by the petitioner/plaintiff on 08.10.2026.
6. Insofar this revision is concerned, it is confined to the order passed under Order IX Rule 7 CPC setting aside the ex parte order dated 19.09.2025. This Court does not find any perversity in the said order and it does not warrant the interference of this Court. However, the Court below had committed a procedural error in entertaining the application seeking leave to defend in
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J. gm I.A.No.6 of 2025 in O.S.No.4413 of 2025 when admittedly such application has been filed only on 25.09.2025 with a delay. Therefore, the Court below cannot proceed further with the enquiry in that application without there being an application to condone the delay in filing the application seeking leave to defend. Therefore, the Court below cannot proceed with the enquiry in I.A.No.6 of 2025 in O.S.No.4413 of 2025. The Court below shall keep this observation in mind before proceeding further with the suit. This civil revision petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 30-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No gm To The III Additional City Civil Court, Chennai. Civil Revision Petition No.4862 of 2026