C.R.P(MD)No.1849 & 1876 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.07.2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR C.R.P.(MD)No.1849 & 1876 of 2026 and C.M.P(MD)No.8956 of 2026 1.S.Jeyakarthik @ Karthikeyan 2.S.Ganesh .. Petitioners in both petitions Vs. T.Balakrishnan .. Respondents in both petitions COMMON PRAYER: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the Fair Order and Decreetal order passed in I.A.No. 7 & 8 of 2025 in O.S.No.272 of 2018 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Thanjavur, dated 23.01.2026. For Petitioners : Mr.G.Karnan COMMON ORDER These Civil Revision Petitions have been filed challenging the order passed by the trial Court dismissing the applications filed by the petitioners seeking to condone the delay of 2,454 days in filing a 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P(MD)No.1849 & 1876 of 2026 petition to set aside the ex parte preliminary decree passed against him in a partition suit and also an order dismissing the petition to set aside the exparte decree. 2.The respondent herein filed a suit for partition against the petitioners and four others. The suit was filed against the respondent's mother, brother, son and daughter, as well as the petitioners, who had purchased the suit property from the said defendants. In the said suit, a preliminary decree for partition declaring the respondent/plaintiff's 1/3rd share was passed on 19.09.2018. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the present application on 02.09.2025 seeking to condone the delay of 2,454 days in filing a petition to set aside the ex parte preliminary decree. The said application was dismissed by the trial Court. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have preferred the present Civil Revision Petitions. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners had purchased the suit property from the other sharers, namely the defendants 1 to 4, and therefore, they have a substantial interest in the suit property. It was further submitted that since valuable rights of the parties are involved, the Court should not be guided by mere procedural technicalities and should afford an opportunity to the petitioners to contest the suit on merits. The 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P(MD)No.1849 & 1876 of 2026 learned counsel relied upon the judgment of this Court in Ajay Kumar Golecha v. Vijay Kumar and another, reported in 2015 (1) CTC 811, in support of his submissions. 4. A perusal of the affidavit filed by the petitioners in support of the petition to condone the delay shows that the petitioners had received the suit summons, but could not appear before the Court and contest the suit due to their personal work at Chennai. Except for the said reason, no other explanation has been offered in the affidavit to justify the inordinate delay. Admittedly, the petitioners received the suit summons but failed to appear before the trial Court, as a result of which the ex parte preliminary decree came to be passed on 25.10.2018. Thereafter, the petitioner has not assigned any reason whatsoever for not filing an application to set aside the ex parte decree from the year 2018 till 2025. The only reason given by the petitioners that they were involved in a personal work at Chennai could not be considered for condoning the enormous delay of 2,454 days. 5. It is also seen from the impugned order that the petitioners had entered appearance through counsel in the final decree proceedings in I.A. No.83 of 2021 as early as 26.10.2021. Having entered appearance in the final decree proceedings, the petitioners 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P(MD)No.1849 & 1876 of 2026 ought to have taken immediate steps to set aside the ex parte preliminary decree. However, the present application came to be filed only on 02.09.2025. Thus, absolutely no justification has been shown for the petitioners' failure to initiate appropriate proceedings from October 2021 till September 2025. 6. In the decision relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court held that while considering a petition to condone the delay in filing an application to set aside an ex parte decree, the Court should adopt a liberal approach and afford an opportunity to the parties to contest the matter on merits. There is no dispute with regard to the proposition laid down in the said judgment. However, the facts of the present case stand on a different footing. The petitioner, despite having received the suit summons, failed to appear before the trial Court. Further, even after entering appearance in the final decree proceedings in the year 2021, he waited for nearly four years for filing the present application to set aside the ex parte preliminary decree. The petitioners' failure to take immediate steps after entering appearance in the final decree proceedings clearly demonstrates his supine indifference in prosecuting the matter. When there is gross negligence on the part of the petitioners, this Court cannot, under the guise of adopting a liberal approach, condone such 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P(MD)No.1849 & 1876 of 2026 an inordinate delay. Therefore, the decision relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not applicable to the facts of the present case. 7. In the light of the above discussion, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the trial Court dismissing the condone delay petition. Since C.R.P(MD)No.1849 of 2026 challenging the dismissal of condone delay petition is dismissed as a necessary consequence, C.R.P(MD)No.1876 of 2026 filed to set aside the order passed by the trial Court dismissing the petition to set aside the exparte decree is also dismissed. Accordingly, both these Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 16.07.2026 Index :Yes / No Internet :Yes / No NCC :Yes / No skn To 1.The Additional Sub Court, Thanjavur. 2.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P(MD)No.1849 & 1876 of 2026 S.SOUNTHAR, J. skn C.R.P.(MD)No.1849 & 1876 of 2026 and C.M.P(MD)No.8956 of 2026 16.07.2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis