IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 7TH MARCH 2008 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1929 CRP.No. 2123 of 2003(F) ---------------------------------- O.S.701/1996 OF MUNSIFF COURT, THIRUVALLA .................... PETITIONER/ PETITIONER/ DEFENDANT: ---------------------------------------------------------- JANAKI, THANNIMOTTIL VEEDU, MARAMON MURI, THOTTAPUZHASSERI VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.P.HARIDAS. RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONERS/ COUNTER PETITIONERS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. T.K.JANAKI @ AMMU, KARIMKUTTICKEL VEEDU, THATTACKADU MURI, KOIPURAM VILLAGE FROM THANNIMOTTIL VEEDU, MARAMON MURI, THOTTAPUZHASSERI VILLAGE. 2. APPU, THANNIMOTTIL VEEDU, MARAMON MURI, THOTTAPUZHASSERI VILLAGE. 3. ANIYAN, THANNIMOTTIL VEEDU, MARAMON MURI, THOTTAPUZHASSERI VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.R.SANTHOSH BABU. THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/03/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = C.R.P. NO. 2123 OF 2003 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 7th day of March, 2008. O R D E R This revision petition is preferred against the order of the Munsiff, Thiruvalla in I.A.346/02 and I.A.347/02 in O.S.701/96 whereby the first defendant moved an application for setting aside the exparte decree with a petition to condone the delay. The Court below on a consideration of the materials declined the relief and dismissed the application after condoning the delay. When the matter came up for admission it is seen that the proper remedy for the party is to file an appeal as contemplated under Order 43 Rule (1)(d) of CPC and that not a C.R.P. Therefore the C.R.P. is dismissed as not maintainable. 2. It has to be stated that earnestly believing that some relief can be obtained a revision petition has been preferred before this Court or that an appeal is filed with a CRP NO. 2123 of 2003 -:2:- petition to condone the delay. So the period of pendency of the C.R.P. before the High Court may be considered sympathetically for condoning the delay. The C.R.P. is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-