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 28TH JUNE 2010 / 7TH ASHADHA 1932 Mat.Appeal.No. 182 of 2008 ---------------------------- OP.726/2006 of FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM .................... APPELLANT/ RESPONDENT: --------------- THENGILATH JAIFAR, S/O.MUHAMMEDKUTTY, NETHIYAL VEEDU, PUTHUR PALLIKKAL, PALLICKAL AMSOM, TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DIST-POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER-MUHAMMEDKUTTY,S/O. AHAMMED, THENGILAKATH, PALLIKKAL AMSOM DESOM, TIRURANGADI TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.SAJU.S.A RESPONDENT/PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. PULINGANCHERI LISIYA, D/O.AVARANKUTTY, PATTELATH VEEDU, MUTTAYOOR AMSOM, KODAPURAM ANTHIYOOR KUNNU PO. 2. FATHIMA HIDA, 3YEARS [MINOR] MINOR PETITIONER IS REP. BY GURDIAN MOTHER 1ST PETITIONER] ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON FOR R1 & R2 THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== C.M. APPLICATION NO. 549 OF 2008 & MAT APPEAL NO. 182 OF 2008 ============================ DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2010 ORDER/JUDGMENT Basant,J. It is reported that the conditions imposed vide order dated 14/12/2009, which must have been complied with by 14/1/2010 have not been complied with so far. It is evident that the appellant is not interested in taking advantage of the said order dated 14/12/2009. 2. The petition for condonation of delay shall hence stand dismissed for non-compliance with the conditions imposed. The Mat appeal shall consequently stand rejected as barred by limitation. R. BASANT, JUDGE ks. M.C. HARI RANI,JUDGE C.M. APPLN. IN MAT APPEAL NO. 182/2008 -2- ks. R.BASANT & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== C.M. APPLICATION NO. 549 OF 2008 & MAT APPEAL NO. 182 OF 2008 ============================ DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2009 ORDER Basant,J. This petition is to condone the delay of 34 days in filing an appeal. The appeal in turn is directed against a direction to pay past maintenance at the rate of Rs.2500/- per mensem to the wife and Rs.1,000/- per mensem to the child. There was a further direction to pay an amount of Rs.15,000/- for the treatment expenses of the wife. This application is opposed. But notwithstanding the opposition, we C.M. APPLN. IN MAT APPEAL NO. 182/2008 -3- are satisfied that a lenient view can be taken and the delay can be condoned subject to appropriate terms and conditions. We are satisfied that the appellant who is said to be a person employed abroad can be directed to deposit the entire amount due under the impugned order as condition for condonation of delay. 2. In the result: a) This petition is allowed subject to conditions. b)The delay shall stand condoned and this petition shall stand allowed on condition that the appellant deposits the entire amount due under the impugned order before the Family Court within a period of thirty days from this date. 3. Call after thirty days or earlier, if deposit is made and voucher is produced. R. BASANT, JUDGE M.C. HARI RANI,JUDGE ks. C.M. APPLN. IN MAT APPEAL NO. 182/2008 -4-