IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 9200 / 8 RSA.No. 8 of 2008() ------------------- AS.256/2004 of VI ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM OS.653/2000 of I ADDL.M.C.,ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF: JOHN KARIPAT, S/O.AUGUSTINE, AGED 74 YEARS, RETD. COLLEGE TEACHER, KARIPAT HOUSE, KALOOR DESOM, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM JOHN RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS: 1. DR.V.K.SAHAJANANDAN, S/O.VASUDEVAN @ KOCHUPILLA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, VELLAANAPARAMBIL HOUSE, JUDGES AVENUE, KALOOR, COCHIN-17, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM. 2. CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, COCHIN-11. BY ADV. SRI.M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN - R1 SMT.S.KARTHIKA - R1 SRI.M.R.ANISON - R1 SMT.K.P.GEETHA MANI -R1 THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2008, THE COURT ON 16/06/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.P.BALACHANDRAN, J ------------------------------ C.M. Appl. No. 8 of 2008 and R.S.A. No. 8 of 2008 ------------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT This is an application filed by the appellant seeking for condonation of delay of 30 days in filing the Regular Second Appeal. The judgment assailed is dated 12/01/2007. The copy of the judgment was applied for only on 24/01/2007. The stamp papers called for on 2/04/2007 were produced only on 7/04/2007 and the copy was taken delivery of only on 24/05/2007, though the date fixed to receive the copy was 23/05/2007. 2. According to the appellant, who has filed affidavit in support of the C.M. Application, he received the copy of the judgment only on 24/05/2007 and the appeal had to be preferred on or before 10/8/2007, but it could be filed only on 10/09/2007 with a delay of 30 days. The explanations in the affidavit are that after receiving the copy of the judgment it took few days for studying the matter and take a decision regrading the appeal to be preferred against the R.S.A.No.8/2008 Page numbers same, that after taking decision he advised his counsel to prefer appeal, but, immediately he had a viral fever which resulted in severe body and joint pain for reason of which he could not meet his counsel or take necessary steps to prefer the appeal and by the time he met his counsel the delay of 30 days had occurred and that there is no wilful neglect on his part in preferring the appeal within time. 3. The appellant has not produced any evidence to show that he was bedridden due to viral fever with severe body and joint pain so as to render him incapable of travelling to meet his lawyer and cause this R.S.A to be filed. 4. The application for condonation of delay is vehemently opposed also by the first respondent, who has filed a detailed counter affidavit, contending that appellant was having altogether 82 days for preferring the appeal after receiving the copy; that the grounds stated for the delay are not correct and without any bonafides and the delay condonation petition is to be dismissed. It is seen that the appellant has assigned his illness as reason for the delay in filing the appeal. The delay is as much as 30 days. It is not likely that viral fever would have lasted for 30 days. Further, no R.S.A.No.8/2008 Page numbers medical certificate is also produced. On the appellant making a bald statement that he was having viral fever, the delay of 30 days cannot be condoned, especially when the truth thereof is disputed by the respondents. In the circumstances, I am not of the view that the delay is to be condoned. 5. In the result, refusing to condone the delay of 30 days in filing the R.S.A, I dismiss the C.M. Application. Consequently, the Regular Second appeal also stands dismissed. K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE scm