CRP No. 5438 of 2025 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI CRP No. 5438 of 2025 1. Minor S.Durgadevi D/o. Singaravel, Rep. by Guardian and Next friend Mother Kannammal W/o. Singaravel, Res. at Muslim Street, Kaliyanur Road, Sankari Post, Sankari Taluk, Salem District. 2. Minor S. Vimaladevi D/o. Singaravel, Rep. by Guardian and Next friend Mother Kannammal W/o. Singaravel, Res. at Muslim Street, Kaliyanur Road, Sankari Post, Sankari Taluk, Salem District. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. C.Raja S/o. Late Sendrayan, Vellakarattukadu, Travellers Bungalow Road, Sankari Village, Sankari Taluk, Salem District. 2. R.Singaravel S/o. C. Raja, Muslim Street, Kalliyanur Village, Sankari Post, Sankari Taluk, Salem District. 3. R.Murugavel S/o. C. Raja, Res. at Travellers Bungalow Road, Sankari Village, Sankari Taluk, Salem District. 4. Sathyavani D/o. C. Raja, Res. at Travellers Bungalow Road, Sankari Village, Sankari Taluk, Salem District. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This petition is filed under Section 115 of C.P.C to set aside the order dated 05.09.2018 made in IA No.1496 of 2017 in OS NO.114 of 2010 on the file of the District Munsif, Sankari. CRP No. 5438 of 2025 __________ Page2 of 4 For Petitioner(s): MS.K.VIJAYALAKSHMI FOR M/S.DASS AND VISWA ASSOCIATES For Respondent(s): MS.S.AIYSHWARYA FOR M/S.SARVABHAUMAN ASSOCIATES FOR R4 MR.B.GOPALAKRISHNAN FOR R2 ORDER This petition is filed to set aside the fair and decreetal orders passed on 05.09.2018 in IA No.1496 of 2017 in OS NO.114 of 2010 on the file of the District Munsif, Sankari. 2.The case of the petitioner herein is that the above suit was dismissed for default on 03.06.2026. Hence, the petitioner filed IA No.1496 of 2017 in OS NO.114 of 2010 on the file of the District Munsif, Sankari to restore the suit on file with a delay of 141 days and the same was dismissed on 05.9.2018. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner has come up with this petition. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that when the aforesaid suit was posted for filing of consequential amendment petition to amend the plaint to that effect, it was informed by the petitioner’s advocate that the consequential amendment petition can be filed only after boycott is withdrawn by the advocates, whereas the advocate’s boycott continued for a long period. CRP No. 5438 of 2025 __________ Page3 of 4 He further submitted that the petitioners have taken all possible steps to file the restore application, inspite of that there was a delay in proceeding the case. Hence prays to allow this petition. 4.On a perusal of records, it is seen that the petitioners are the legal heirs of the second respondent and they have right over the subject property. Due to lack of communication, they were not unable to contest the suit. Hence, they have filed the application to restore the suit with a delay of 41 days and the same was dismissed on 05.09.2018. Hence, in order to give one more opportunity to the petitioner, this Court is inclined to allow this petition 5. In view of the above, the order passed in IA No.1496 of 2017 in OS NO.114 of 2010 on the file of the District Munsif, Sankari is set side and the learned Judge is directed to restore the suit in O.S.No.114 of 2010. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. No order as to costs. 24-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SMN To. The District Munsif, Sankari. CRP No. 5438 of 2025 __________ Page4 of 4 T.V.THAMILSELVI, J. SMN CRP No. 5438 of 2025 24-06-2026