IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1930 CRP.No.351 of 2006 ----------------------- LRAS.99/1989 of A.A.(LR),ERNAKULAM OA.377/1986 of LAND TRIBUNAL, VYPEEN .................... REVN. PETITIONER/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------------------- KOCHUPENNU, AGED 80 YEARS, D/O.OMAL, NIKATHU THARA, POOYAPPILLY MURI, VADAKKEKKARA PAKUTY, PARUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JAYAKUMAR C.K. SRI.K.M.SREEKANTH RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS ------------------------------------------------------ 1. RADHA, W/O.BRAHMAN, KANNATTUSSERY, PERUMPADANNA MURI, PARUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 2. DANI, S/O.BRAHMAN, DO.DO. 3. RASHEEDA, D/O.BRAHMAN, DO.DO. 4. DILEEPKUMAR, S/O.BRAHMAN, DO.DO. ADV. SRI.S.VIDYASAGAR THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.P.BALACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------------------------ C. M. Application No.371 of 2006 & C. R. P. No.351 of 2006 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 11th day of November, 2008 ORDER Heard counsel on both sides. Counsel for the respondents points out that against the judgment of the Appellate Authority, C.R.P. 1611/99 was filed by the very same petitioner before this Court and that was dismissed by this Court vide order dt.25/09/04 and that the present CRP is filed suppressing that fact. Counsel for the petitioner is unable to offer any explanation on that aspect. Further this CRP is filed with a delay of 5032 days (i.e. Thirteen and a half years) and that is sought to be condoned vide C.M. Application No.371/06. In support of the application a medical certificate is produced which is dt.08/06/06 wherein it is certified that the petitioner is suffering from diabetic C. R. P. No.351 of 2006 -2- hypertension etc. and has been under treatment in General Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram since 05/06/06. That means the certificate is issued on the third day of the treatment. This has no bearing at all to have the delay of thirteen and a half years condoned as prayed for vide C.M. Application No.371/06. There is absolutely no merit in the application seeking for condonation of delay. Further, on merits also the petitioner has no case as vide order in O.A.377/86, shifting was ordered on application of the respondents after considering all the objections raised by the petitioner. Appeal filed by her before the Appellate Authority as L.R.A.S.99/89 was dismissed on 15/05/92. It is assailing the said judgment in appeal that this C.R.P is filed on 20/06/06. The property to which shifting is sought for was found to be suitable for shifting the “kudikidappu” on the C. R. P. No.351 of 2006 -3- basis of the report of the Revenue Inspector. The cost of shifting is also deposited on 07/04/93 as submitted by the counsel for the respondent as per receipt No.18/167 of Land Tribunal, Vypeen. It is also submitted that document No.4124/89 dt.07/11/89 has also been executed in favour of the petitioner by the respondents transferring right over 10 cents of property to which “kudikidappu” is sought to be got shifted. In the circumstances, there is no merit in this C.R.P and the C.R.P is intended to protract the implementation of shifting order passed by the Land Tribunal which is confirmed by the Appellate Authority and this Court. This delay condonation application as well as the C.R.P are hence, dismissed. K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE kns/-