IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2009 / 2ND ASHADHA 1931 FAO.No. 331 of 2008() --------------------- OS.85/2006 of PRL.SUB COURT,THRISSUR .................... (S): APPELLANT/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF -------------------------------------------------- MANI, S/O.PALLIYIL AYYAPPANKUTTY, GANDHI NAGAR, PERINGAVU VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.DILIP J. AKKARA RESPONDENT(S): DEFENDANTS ------------------------- 1. MAYA MENON, W/O.VENUGOPALA MENON, WARRIAM ROAD, ERNAKULAM. 2. REMALAKSHMI, SHEESHAL MAHAL HOUSE, HOUSE NO.140, BAMJARE HILLS NO.II ROAD, HYDERABAD. ADV. SRI.A.BALAGOPALAN FOR R1 & 2 SRI.A.RAJAGOPALAN FOR R1 & 2 THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------------------- CM Application No.2535/08 & FAO 331 OF 2008 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated 23rd June 2009 Judgment RAMAN, J. The appeal is filed against the order dismissing IA No.7150/07 in OS No.85/06, seeking restoration of the suit. The order shows that the IA was dismissed for the absence of the petitioner or his counsel, despite calling the matter even before the court rose for the day. Further, the suit was rejected for non- remittance of the court fee. Instead of filing an appeal, a petition seeking to set aside the order and to restore the case on file was filed, which is stated to be not maintainable. Thus, there is hardly any merit in the appeal. Further, there is a delay of 212 days in filing the appeal. Though the delay is supported by an affidavit, we are not satisfied that the delay is properly explained. For all the above reasons, CM Application No.2535/08 is FAO 331/08 2 dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal is also dismissed. The learned counsel for the appellant, however, submitted that instead of filing the appeal, he is also entitled to file a review petition. If so, this judgment will not stand in the way of the appellant, seeking such a remedy. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sta FAO 331/08 3