IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2009 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1931 RSA.No. 1119 of 2008 ----------------------------------- AS.256/2006 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, PARAVUR OS.103/1999 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, PARAVUR .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF: NALINI, W/O.KUTTAN, AGED 48 YEARS, JAYA BHAVAN, KALPADA, KOTTAYAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK, WORKING AT WEST COAST INDUSTRIAL GASES LTD., D.A.PLANT, KADAVANTHARA, KOCHI. AT PRESENT RESIDING AT CHAKKALAKKAL HOUSE, SAHAKARANA ROAD, EDAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS: 1. DANAVAN ALIAS DANASEELAN, S/O.RAJAPPAN, AGED 53 YEARS, PARAMPATHERIL, KATTATHURUTH, MOOTHAKUNNAM TALUK, PARAVUR TALUK. 2. ARUN SAGAR, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.DANAVAN ALIAS DANASEELAN, DO. DO. 3. ABHITHA, AGED 21 YEARS, DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.N.HARIDAS THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.P. Balachandran, J. -------------------------- R.S.A.No.1119 of 2008 & C.M.Appl.No.867 of 2008 -------------------------- JUDGMENT Heard counsel on both sides. 2. C.M.Appl.No.867/08 is an application seeking for condonation of delay of as much as 209 days in filing the Regular Second Appeal. The judgment appealed against is one delivered on 11.12.2007. Copy of judgment was applied for on 12.12.2007. Stamp papers called for on 7.01.2008 were produced only on 10.01.2008. Though the date fixed to appear and receive the copy was 17.01.2008, copy was taken delivery of only after about a month on 15.02.2008. This Regular Second Appeal is filed, after about nine months therefrom, on 10.11.2008. 2. In the affidavit filed by the appellant in support of the C.M. Application, the explanation offered for the delay is that she has changed her residence in the meanwhile and due to an oversight, RSA 1119/08 2 she failed to inform the changed address to her counsel and so she did not receive the communication issued by her counsel regarding the judgment and decree and receipt of certified copy of the judgment under appeal. She further states that she was not well and was in great financial stringency and came to know about the judgment and decree and receipt of certified copy of the judgment under appeal only on 23.10.2008 and it is, therefore, that there occurred a delay of as much as 209 days in filing the Regular Second Appeal. The explanation offered itself shows that she did not make any enquiry with respect to her appeal pending in the lower appellate court or the judgment passed therein or whether copy was applied for from 11.12.2007, the date on which the judgment in A.S.No.256/06 was pronounced, till 23.10.2008, on which day, according to the appellant, she came to know of the judgment and receipt of copy of judgment. It was up to the appellant to prosecute RSA 1119/08 3 her cause promptly and her failure to do the needful in the case cannot disturb the findings of the appellate court after a long delay putting the respondents to further harassment. The reasons offered are not sufficient cause to condone the delay of as much as 209 days in filing the Regular Second Appeal. In the result, I dismiss this C.M. Application. R.S.A.No.1119/08 C.M.Appl.No.867/08 filed seeking for condonation of delay of as much as 209 days in filing the Regular Second Appeal is dismissed today. Therefore, this Regular Second Appeal is hopelessly barred by limitation. In the result, I dismiss this Regular Second Appeal. 31st March, 2009 (K.P.Balachandran, Judge) tkv