KANNAMMAL Vs. SUBATRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners herein, who suffered a preliminary decree in the suit for partition, had preferred an appeal A.S.No.236 of 1996 on the file of the First Additional District Judge Erode. THE said appeal was dismissed for default on 25.11.1997. THE petitioners filed an application for setting aside the order of dismissal on 23.12.1997. THE said-application was returned by the lower appellate Court for certain compliance. Neither the petitioners nor their counsel evinced any interest in representing the matter and pursued the same. However, the said papers were represented with a delay of 636 days. Now, I.A.No.240 of 1999 filed by the petitioners to condone the delay of 636 days in representing the papers had been dismissed by the lower appellate Court and against the same, the present revision petition has been filed.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners represents that the second appellant Mr.Gunasekaran was looking after the matter and since he died, the other appellants were not aware about the proceedings. Hence, the appeal was dismissed for default and immediately, the petitioners herein filed an application for restoration of the appeal. Hence, there is some delay.