IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2298 of 2011() --------------------------------------------- CRMP.1351/2010 IN CRA.286/2010 of SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM CRMP.4129/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, ERNAKULAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/RESPONDENT -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. E.J.THOMAS,AGED 61 YEARS,S/O.JOSEPH, R/AT 301-A,VRINDAVAN APARTMENTS VYTTILA.P.O, POONITHURA VILLAGE,KANAYANNOOR TALUK,ERNAKULAM. 2. SHOBIN THOMAS,AGED 34 YEARS,S/O.THOMAS, R/AT 301-A,VRINDAVAN APARTMENTS VYTTILA.P.O, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SMT.T.S.MAYA (THIYADIL) RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------- 1. SUSAN THOMAS,AGED 57 YEARS,W/O.THOMAS, R/AT ERAMPLACKAL,37/1239 B 10,ST.SEBASTIAN ROAD, VITILLA,ERNAKULAM,KOCHI-682 019. 2. KERALA STATE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA. R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.N.MATHEW R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.P.PADMALAYAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts CRRP.NO.2298/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEX A1 COPY OF THE SBI BANK STATEMENT. ANNEX A2 COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN M.C.18/2009 PENDING BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT ERNAKULAM. ANNEX A3 COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF THEIR YOUNGER SON IN M.C.18/2009 PENDING BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT ERNAKULAM. ANNEX A4 COPY OF THE PENSION DETAILS OF THE 1ST REVISION PETITIONER. ANNEX A5 COPY OF THE COUNTER FOILS OF THE CHELLANS DATED 29/7/10 & 2/11/2010. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J -------------------------------------- Crl.R.P No.2298 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of November 2011 ORDER Read the order dated 18-10-2011, by which the delay in filing the appeal preferred by the revision petitioners as against the order passed by the trial Magistrate, which was not condoned by the learned sessions Judge, resulting in the rejection of the appeal, was ordered to be condoned subject to the condition directing payment of cost fixed to the respondents within the time limit ordered. Condition imposed for payment of cost, it is reported, has been complied with within the time fixed. As the challenge in the revision was confined to the rejection of the appeal consequent to the dismissal of the petition for condoning the delay moved by the revision petitioners, in the light of the aforesaid order, nothing more survives for consideration before this court. The court below shall take back the appeal on its file and dispose it on its merits after hearing both sides. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent pointing out that no amount has been paid despite the order of the trial court, seeks for a direction to the court below for an expeditious disposal of the appeal. Having regard to the time limit fixed under the statute under which the present proceedings have arisen, the Crl. R.P No.2298 OF 2011 2 court below is directed to dispose the appeal as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of appearance of the parties before that court. Parties are directed to mark their appearance through their counsel before the court below on 30-11-2011. Revision is disposed of. Sd/- vdv S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge