IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2007 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1929 WP(C).No. 18474 of 2007(Y) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24/11/2006 IN IA 718/2006 IN AS.353/2004 of D.C & SESSIONS COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: ------------ CHELLAPPAN CHETTIAR, PROPRIETOR, M.C. OIL MILLS,THYCAUD, PIRAPPANCODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.ANANDAKUTTAN SMT.M.HEMALATHA SRI.R.S.MADHU SRI.MAHESH ANANDAKUTTAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, OFFICE AT VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT MANAGER, K.F.C OFFICE AT VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.L.MOHANAN, SC, KFC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ----------------------------- WP(C).No. 18474 OF 2007 Y ----------------------------- Dated this the 20th June, 2007. JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P3 order passed by the District Judge, Thiruvananthapuram in I.A.718/06 in A.S.353/04. The writ petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.481/99 and the suit was dismissed by the trial court. Against which he preferred the appeal A.S.353/04 and it was dismissed for default. The petitioner then filed an application to readmit the appeal with a petition to condone the delay of 407 days in filing the application. He was examined and it is submitted that he was laid up and further he also produced a medical certificate in support of the contentions. The learned District Judge was dissatisfied with the evidence on record. It has to be borne in mind that the appellant is a plaintiff in the suit and he was eager enough to contest the case, so one cannot attribute that there has been gross negligence or misconduct. The broad principles of natural justice always demands an opportunity to be given to the party to contest the case on merits. So, in the light of these principles, I am inclined to condone the delay and direct the District Judge to restore the appeal. It is made clear that the writ petitioner herein shall not take WPC 18474/07 2 the attitude to adjourn the case and, therefore, he must co-operate with the court for disposal of the appeal itself within a time frame of three months. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Send a copy of the judgment to the District Judge, Thiruvananthapuram for necessary compliance. M.N.KRISHNAN Judge jj