High Court · 2025

C.R.P.(MD)No. 1888 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED: 21.07.2025CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANIC.R.P.(MD)No.1888 of 2025andC.M.P.(MD)No.10444 of 2025Sekku (died)1.Vijayalakshmi2.Kanagasabapathi3.Sethupathi4.Umapathy...Petitioners Vs.Palanisamy...Respondent PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to set aside the Fair and Decreetal order in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in O.S.No.105 of 2019, on the file of the Learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate at Singampunari, Sivagangai District dated 14.11.2024 and allow the Civil Revision Petition.1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(MD)No. 1888 of 2025For Petitioners: Mr.N.PalaniyandiFor Respondent : Mr.S.R.Anandharaj O R D E RThis petition has been filed seeking to set aside the Fair and Decreetal order in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in O.S.No.105 of 2019, on the file of the Learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate at Singampunari, Sivagangai District dated 14.11.2024.2.Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the legal heir of fifth defendant namely Sethuraman.3.Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent / plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.7 of 2014, on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirupathur, Sivagangai District, for partition claiming 2/3rd property from petitioner's husband who is the fifth defendant, Shanmugavelu, Palaniammal, Angayarkanni and on Gapathi @ Sivagnanam. As against the fifth defendant, an ex-parte decree was passed on 30.06.2014. However, the same was not intimated to the petitioner's husband and he came to know about the same only on 10.06.2024. On that day, he filed a petition to set 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(MD)No. 1888 of 2025aside ex-parte order in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in O.S.No.105 of 2019, on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Singampunari, Sivagangai District and the same was dismissed on 14.11.2024. However, the petitioner's husband died on 23.01.2025. Thereafter, the petitioners filed a C.M.P. before this Court to implead themselves as party in the present C.R.P., in C.M.P.(MD)No.9906 of 2025 and the same was allowed by this Court and thereafter, the Civil Revision Petition was numbered, challenging the ex-parte order as against the first petitioner's husband. 4.Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that though initially the suit was filed in O.S.No.7 of 2014, on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirupathur, Sivagangai District, subsequently, the same was transferred to District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Singampunari, for want of jurisdiction and re-numbered as O.S.No.105 of 2019. Admittedly, against the other defendants the suit is not disposed of. The evidence is also not taken. The suit is only in the preliminary stage. Though there is a huge delay in filing the set aside ex-parte decree petition, however, on allowing the said application on behalf of the deceased fifth defendant, no prejudice would be caused to the respondent / plaintiff. Admittedly, the respondent / plaintiff impleaded the petitioner's husband as fifth defendant and 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(MD)No. 1888 of 2025hence, the legal heirs of the fifth defendant are necessary parties to contest the case on behalf of the fifth defendant. Hence, prays for allowing the Civil Revision Petition. 5.Per contra, learned Counsel for the respondent would submit that already the very same petitioner's husband namely fifth defendant filed a suit in O.S.No.113 of 2018 as against the respondent / plaintiff and the said suit was dismissed. The property which is claimed by the fifth defendant and the present partition suit are one and the same. Hence, there is no need for fresh adjudication in respect of the fifth defendant or the petitioners herein in the partition suit by the petitioners. Ex-parte decree was granted in the year 2014, which cannot be set aside in the year 2025, after a lapse of eleven years. However, learned Counsel fairly admitted that till date, the suit is not disposed of. Accordingly, prays for dismissal of the suit. 6.Heard the learned Counsel on either side. 7.Admittedly, the facts in the present case are not in dispute. The first petitioner's husband was impleaded as fifth defendant in the suit filed by the respondent / plaintiff in O.S.No.7 of 2014, on the file of the District Munsif 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(MD)No. 1888 of 2025cum Judicial Magistrate, Thirupathur, Sivagangai District, which came to be transferred and re-numbered as O.S.No.105 of 2019, on the file of District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Singampunari, for want of jurisdiction. Thereafter, the suit came to be set-exparte as against the fifth respondent on 30.06.2014. Thereafter, the first petitioner's husband filed I.A.No.1 of 2024, for setting aside the ex-parte decree. Meanwhile, the petitioner's husband died on 23.01.2025. Thereafter, the said I.A. was dismissed on 14.11.2024. Hence, the petitioners being the legal heirs of the fifth defendant are before this Court assailing the order passed in I.A.No.1 of 2024.8.Repeatedly, the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this Court has held that the delay has to be considered leniently and opportunity must be given to the parties to contest. In the present case, though there is a huge delay of 11 years, it is an admitted fact that the suit remains indisposed as regards the other defendants and the suit is still in the preliminary stage. Hence, at this stage, restoring the suit as regards the fifth defendant would not cause great prejudice to the respondent / plaintiff.9.Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed and the order made by the trial Court in I.A.1 of 2024, is set aside, on condition that the petitioners 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(MD)No. 1888 of 2025pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- to the respondent / plaintiff as cost. On receipt of the payment of cost, the trial Court is directed to restore the suit as regards the fifth defendant and allow the legal heirs of the fifth defendant to file written statement within a period of two [2] weeks from the date of amendment before the trial Court. Thereafter, the trial Court is directed to proceed with the case in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.21.07.2025Internet:Yes/NoIndex:Yes/NoMR6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(MD)No. 1888 of 2025To1.The District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Singampunari, Sivagangai District. 2.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(MD)No. 1888 of 2025M.DHANDAPANI , J. MRC.R.P.(MD)No.1888 of 2025 21.07.20258/8