IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE MONDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2007 / 4TH ASHADHA 1929 WP(C).No. 31354 of 2003(G) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- M.MOHAN DAS PRABHU, S/O. MADHAVA PRABHU, CHUNDIRATHIL VEETTIL, KAYAMKULAM DESOM, KAYAMKULAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. M/S. ERNAKULAM FINANCIERS AND KURIES PVT. LTD., T.D. ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-35, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR.M.V.LONAPPAN, S/O. MAVELI VARIED, MANTHRA ROAD, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE, COCHIN TALUK. 2. D.PRASAD, S/O. LATE J.DASA PAI, PRASAD NIVAS, VADAKKE NADA OF ALAPPUZHA THIRUMALA DEVASWOM TEMPLE, A.N.PURAM, ALAPPUZHA. 3. D.PRAKASH, S/O. LATE J.DAS PAI, CHUNKIRATHIL HOUSE, KAYAMKULAM VILLAGE, KAYAMKULAM DESOM. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.JOHN for R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.31354 of 2003 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 25th June, 2007 JUDGMENT Even though learned counsel for the petitioner would address very strenuous arguments, I am unable to say that Ext.P1 order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge dismissing an application for condonation of delay caused in the matter of filing the application to set aside the ex parte decree and consequently dismissing the application to set aside ex parte decree also suffers from any infirmity warranting interference by this court under Article 227 of the Constitution. The impugned orders are well reasoned orders and it is seen that the learned Subordinate Judge on a perusal of the records noticed that the claim of the petitioner that he had been served no summons or notice and that he came to know about the passage of the decree only on getting notice from the execution court is not true. The learned Subordinate Judge further noticed that even if it is assumed that the petitioner came to have knowledge about the passage of the decree only on getting notice from the execution court, then also there is no convincing reasons regarding the delay which has been occasioned subsequently. At any rate there is no warrant for interfering with Ext.P1 order in the supervisory W.P.C.No.31354/03 - 2 - jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution. The Writ Petition will stand dismissed. No costs. srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE