IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2009 / 25TH JYAISHTA 1931 Mat.Appeal.No. 140 of 2003() ---------------------------- OP.160/2001 of FAMILY COURT, MANJERI .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: ---------------------------- O.T.PRABHAVATHI D/O. THEYYUNNI OZHUKKOOR HOUSE, KOTTEPADAM, CHUNGATHARA, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.V.G.ARUN RESPONDENT: PETITIONER ------------------------------ RADHAKRISHNAN, SANTHISADANAM, VATTALOOR, MAKKARAPARAMBA, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM. ADV. SRI.K.SHIBILI NAHA SMT.A.LOWSY THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------ C.M.Application No. 1246 of 2003 & Mat.Appeal No.140 OF 2003 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 15th DAY OF JUNE, 2009 O R D E R / J U D G M E N T Basant, J. This application is to condone the delay of 155 days in filing an appeal and such appeal is directed against a decree for divorce. The application is opposed on the ground that the respondent herein under the bonafide belief that no appeal has been filed has got re-married after the appeal period was over. In these circumstances, the delay may not be condoned, it is urged. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that he has no instructions from the appellant about the said alleged remarriage. At any rate, the same is not denied. We are in these circumstances satisfied that it is not necessary to take any lenient view and condone the long delay of 155 days in filing the appeal. The application for condonation of delay is hence dismissed. The appeal preferred shall consequently stand rejected as barred by limitation. R.BASANT, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn