CRP/5166/2026 of Krishnan Vs Siva on 2 November 2026

ORDER

This civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of The Constitution of India against the order dated 02.4.2026 made in I.A.No.4 of 2026 in O.S.No.303 of 2024 on the file of the Additional District Court, Dharmapuri (for short, the Court below) wherein the application filed by the respondent/D1 under Order IX Rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) seeking to set aside the ex parte order came to be allowed on payment of costs of Rs.1,000/- to the petitioners/plaintiffs.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/D1.

3. This Court has carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record and more particularly the impugned order.

4. The petitioners, who are the plaintiffs, filed the said suit seeking for the relief of declaration of title, for permanent injunction and for other consequential reliefs. In the said suit, the respondent/ D1 filed a written statement. However, subsequent to that, he did not appear before the Court below and therefore, the Court below proceeded to record the ex parte evidence on 24.4.2025. Hence, the respondent/D1 filed the said application seeking to set aside the ex parte order and it came to be allowed by the Court below by the impugned order. Aggrieved by that, the above revision has been filed before this Court.

5. The main ground that was urged on the side of the petitioners/plaintiffs is that the respondent/D1, after filing the written statement, intentionally did not contest the said suit, that he was a fence sitter, who was watching the proceedings in the said suit and that ultimately, when the said suit was at the stage of passing final judgment, earlier, an application in I.A.No.3 of 2025 was filed by the third defendant seeking to set aside the ex parte order and that it came to be dismissed by the Court below on 03.2.2026 on the ground that such an application was not maintainable when the suit was at the stage of pronouncement of the judgment whereas when a similar application was filed by the respondent/D1, the Court below, disregarding its earlier order, allowed the present application filed by the respondent/D1. Therefore, it is contended on the side of the petitioners that the impugned order passed by the Court below is, on the face of it, illegal.

6. In order to substantiate his submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arjun Singh Vs. Mohindra Kumar [reported in AIR 1964 SC 993].

7. In the case in hand, it is not in dispute that the written statement has been filed by the respondent/D1. Thereafter, for the reasons best known to him, he did not contest the case and therefore, the ex parte evidence was recorded and the suit is at the stage of pronouncing the final judgment. If, ultimately, an ex parte decree is passed, once again, the respondent/D1 will file an application to set aside the ex parte decree under Order IX Rule 13 of the CPC. Normally, when such an application is filed, the Courts entertain the same. Therefore, no useful purpose will be served in dismissing the present application under Order IX Rule 7 of the CPC. Further, instead of wasting time, the impugned order passed by the Court below can be sustained by putting the respondent/D1 on terms and also fixing a time frame for the disposal of the main suit.

8. In the light of the above discussions, the above civil revision petition is disposed of and the impugned order dated 02.4.2026 made in I.A.No.4 of 2026 in O.S.No.303 of 2024 on the file of the Additional District Court, Dharmapuri is sustained subject to a condition that the respondent/D1 shall pay costs of Rs.7,500/- (Rupees seven thousand and five hundred only) to the petitioners/ plaintiffs/their counsel within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If this condition is complied with, the impugned order passed by the Court below will be sustained. If the said condition is not complied with, the ex parte order passed against the respondent/D1 will be confirmed. On compliance of the said condition, the Court below shall proceed to deal with the said suit on merits and dispose it of within a period of four months therefrom. No costs. Consequently, the connected CMP is closed.

02-11-2026 To The Additional District Court, Dharmapuri. RS

N.ANAND VENKATESH,J RS CRP.No.5166 of 2026& CMP.No.22520 of 2026 02-11-2026