IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2008 / 28TH SRAVANA 1930 RSA.No. 264 of 2008 ----------------------- AS.93/2001 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA OS.43/1999 of SUB COURT, THIRUVALLA .................... APPELLANT: APPELLANT/DEFENDANT ----------------------------------------- P.A.CHERIAN ,AGED 59, S/O.ABRAHAM PATTERIL HOUSE,,MALAPPALLY WEST MURI MALLAPPALLY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE RESPONDENT: RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF -------------------------------------------- MALLAPPALLY GRAMA PANCHAYATH REP. BY ITS SECRETARY GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE, MALLAPPALLY. BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN FOR R1 SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.P. BALACHANDRAN,J. ----------------------------------------------------------------- C.M. Application No 202 of 2008 and R.S.A. No 264 of 2008 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th August 2008 JUDGMENT Affidavit is filed by the appellant reporting that A.S. No 93 of 2001 was admitted by the first appellate court on 02.07.2002. The appeal was being dismissed on 12.12.2006 for non payment of balance court fee. That was after more than four years. Still the appeal is filed before this court with a delay of 351 days. For all these delays the explanation of the appellant is that he was laid up due to hami plegia from 16.08.2006 onwards. There is absolutely no evidence other than the interested statement made in the affidavit to show that the appellant-petitioner was laid up due to hami plegia from 16.08.2006 onwards. A party who is negligent in prosecuting his case cannot be allowed to have all delays condoned and to prosecute the appeal after several years to the detriment of the successful party. In the above view, I refuse to condone the delay there being no just and sufficient cause to condone the delay and dismiss the C.M. RSA 264/08 2 Application. Consequently the R.S.A also stands dismissed. Sd/- K.P. BALACHANDRAN Judge 19/08/2008 en Order on I.A. No 655 of 2008 -------------------------------------- Dismissed. Id./- K.P. Balachandran, Judge 19/08/2008 [true copy]