1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 01.11.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2005 of 2011 and MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.2 of 2011 The Management, Annamalaiyar Paper Mill, Sakkottai, Sivagangai District. .. Petitioner Vs. S.Parani @ Paranitharan .. Respondent Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 05.04.2010 passed in Interlocutory Application No.68 of 2009 in W.C.No.112 of 2006 by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Madurai. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Aravind Subramaniam For Respondent : Mr.S.Karthik ORDER This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order passed in Interlocutory Application No.68 of 2009 in W.C.No.112 of 2006 by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Madurai. 2. The respondent herein as petitioner has filed W.C.No.112 of 2006 on the file of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Madurai praying to pass an award for the amount mentioned therein, wherein the present revision petitioner has been shown as respondent. In W.C.No.112 of 2006, an ex-parte order has been passed on 22.07.2009 and in order to set aside the same, the present petition has been filed in Interlocutory Application No.68 of 2009 and the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Madurai has dismissed the present petition due to default on the part of the petitioner. Against the order passed in Interlocutory Application No.68 of 2009, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner has contended that the counsel of the petitioner, who made his appearance before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Madurai, failed to give proper instruction and due to that in W.C.No.112 of 2006, an ex-parte order has been passed and in order to set aside the same, the present petition has been filed and even in the present petition also the counsel has failed to give proper instruction and due to that the present https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 petition has been dismissed for default and under the said circumstances, the order passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Madurai is liable to be set aside. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent has vehemently contended that in W.C.No.112 of 2006 on the basis of available evidence, an executable award has been passed and in order to protract in paying the amount mentioned in the award, the revision petitioner has made this type of attempt and therefore the dismissal order passed in Interlocutory Application No.68 of 2009 is perfectly correct and the same does not require any interference. 5. As narrated earlier, in W.C.No.112 of 2006, an ex-parte order has been passed on 22.07.2009. The present petition has been filed so as to set aside the ex-parte order dated 22.07.2009. The present petition has been dismissed for default due to non-appearance of the revision petitioner. 6. Considering the fact that the present petition has been dismissed for default due to non-appearance of the revision petitioner, this Court is of the view to set aside the order passed in Interlocutory Application No.68 of 2009 for the purpose of giving one more opportunity to the revision petitioner and therefore the present petition deserves to be allowed. 7. In fine, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed without costs and the order passed in Interlocutory Application No.68 of 2009 in W.C.No.112 of 2006 by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Madurai is set aside and the petition filed in Interlocutory Application No.68 of 2009 is remitted to the file of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Madurai. The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour), Madurai is directed to dispose of Interlocutory Application No.68 of 2009 before the end of December, 2011. The revision petitioner is directed to prosecute Interlocutory Application No.68 of 2009 with due diligence. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AE) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner of Labour),Madurai. Copy to: The Section Officer, V.R.Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai C.R.P(NPD)(MD)No.2005 of 2011 and M.P(MD)No.2 of 2011 smn/SMA/16.11.2011/3C/2P 01.11.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/