IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 7TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 16TH BHADRA 1931 Mat.Appeal.No. 376 of 2009() ---------------------------- OP.592/2006 of FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER NO.1/COUNTER PETITIONER NO.1 ----------------------------------------------------------------- SHAJI, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O ABDUL AZEEZ, NAZEEM MANZIL, VENCHEMPU MURI, KARAVALOOR VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, REPRESENTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HIS FATHER ABDUL AZEEZ, NAZEEM MANZIL, VENCHEMPU MURI, KARAVALOOR VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TAULK. BY ADV. SRI.AJAYA KUMAR. G RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/PETITIONERS 2 TO 5/COUNTER PETITIONERS 2 TO 5: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. JARIYATH, D/O KUNJU MUHAMAD, MELATHIL VEEDU, MUKKANNOOR CHERRY, AVNEEESWARAM, KUNNIKODU VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK. 2. PATHUMUTH, AGED 58 YEARS, NAZEEM MANZIL, VENCHEMPUMURI, KARAVALOOR VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TAULK 3. SUJITHA, ELDER SISTER OF SAJI, NAZEEM MANZIL, VENCHEMPU MURI, KARAVALOOR VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TAULK 4. SUNITHA, YOUNGER SISTER OF SHAJI, NAZEEM MANZIL, VENCHEMPU MURI, KARAVALOOR VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TAULK 5. ABDUL AZEEZ, FATHER OF SHAJI NAZEEM MANZIL, VENCHEMPU MURI, KARAVALOOR VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TAULK THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- C.M.Application No.1215 OF 2009 & Mat.Appeal No.376 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 7th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2009 O R D E R /J U D G M E N T Basant, J. This order must be read in continuation of the earlier orders dated 29.6.2009 and 31.7.2009. The petition is to condone the delay of 57 days in filing a Mat.Appeal. The learned counsel for the petitioner in the course of submission, offered to deposit an amount of Rs.1 lakh as already ordered by the court below. Time was granted. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the amount has not been deposited and in these circumstances appropriate orders may be passed. 2. We do not find any satisfactory reason to condone the delay of 57 days in filing the appeal. We are satisfied that the petition for condonation of delay in filing the Mat.A.No.376/09 -2- appeal only deserves to be dismissed. 3. In the result, this petition for condonation of delay is dismissed. Consequently, Mat.Appeal No.376/2009 shall stand rejected as barred by limitation. R.BASANT, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn