IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2008 / 4TH ASHADHA 1930 RSA.No.129 of 2006 (F) ---------------------------- AS.8/1998 of SUB COURT, CHERTHALA OS.559/1990 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT, CHERTHALA .................... APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS 10 & 11: ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. MANOJ, KANDATHIL, KADAKKARAPPALLY MURI, -DO- VILLAGE. 2. SARASIJA OF -DO- -DO-. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFF, D1,D3,D5 TO D9: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SREEAMMA, PADINJARA CHIRAYIL, CHARAMANGALAM MURI, THANNEERMUKKOM SOUTH VILLAGE, NOW RESIDING AT THARAYIL VEETTIL, KADAKKARAPALLY MURI, -DO-VILLAGE 2. BHAVANI, KANDATHIL VEEDU, KADAKKARAPPALLY VILLAGE. 3. SREEDHARAN, VEDIYATHU VEEDU, OF -DO-. 4. KUNJAN PURUSHOTHAMAN, MANGALATH FROM KANDATHIL, VAYALAR WEST P.O., CHERTHALA. 5. PARVATHY, KUNNUMPURATHU OF -DO- -DO-. 6. K.P. PRASANNAN, BAVITHA BHAVANAM FROM -DO- -DO-. RSA.No.129 of 2006 (F) -2- 7. K.P. SURESH, SURESH BHAVAN FROM -DO- -DO-. 8. SUDARSANAN, KUNNUMPURATH, VAYALAR WEST P.O., CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.J.OM PRAKASH FOR R1 THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.P.BALACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------------------------ C. M. Application No.95 of 2006 & R. S. A. No.129 of 2006 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 25th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT This is an application for condonation of delay of 298 days in filing the appeal. A learned Judge of this Court had ordered notice on the above C.M.Application as early as on 01/03/06. Service was not complete as report was to the effect that respondents 2 to 4 and 7 expired. Though the Registry posted the case notifying the defect, there was no representation and therefore, the case was posted at Bench in the defect list. On 02/06/08 when this matter came up in the defect list, counsel for the appellants prayed for three weeks' time to take steps and cure defects. Time was granted as prayed for. It was also ordered that in case steps are not taken within the said time, C.M.Application R. S. A. No.129 of 2006 -2- shall stand dismissed. Three weeks' time expired on 23/06/08. The matter has come up in the defect list today. Counsel for the appellants prays for further extension of time. I see no reason why extension of time has to be granted especially in view of the conditional order passed on 02/06/08. 2. I also note that this C.M. Application is one seeking for condonation of delay of as much as 298 days in filing the appeal. The judgment and decree appealed against was passed on 28/07/04. Copy of judgment was applied for only on 19/05/05, after about ten months. Copy of judgment was delivered on 07/06/05. But the appeal is filed only on 09/09/05 in a case where appeal time had already expired even before applying for copy of judgment. There is no satisfactory explanation in that behalf in the affidavit filed in support of the C.M. Application R. S. A. No.129 of 2006 -3- seeking condonation of delay. Thus, there is no just and sufficient cause also to condone the delay of as much as 298 days in filing the appeal. 3. In the circumstances, no further leniency deserves to be extended to the appellant. This C.M.Application stands dismissed vide order dt.02/06/08. Consequently, this R.S.A also stands dismissed. K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE kns/-