IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 25TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 3RD ASWINA 1930 RFA.No. 403 of 2008 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 31.1.2005 IN OS.NO.361/2002 OF I ADDL.SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM APPELLANT: 2ND DEFENDANT: KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VAIDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN(SR.)SC,KSEB SRI.S.SUJIN RESPONDENTS: PLAINTIFFS/1ST DEFENDANT/ADDL.3RD DEFENDANT: 1. V.B.SAJEEV, S/O.LATE BHASKARAN, VALIYATH MANGALATH HOUSE, THIRUVANIYOOR, THIRUVANIYOOR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. V.B.RAJU, S/O.LATE BHASKARAN, VALIYATH MANGALATH HOUSE, THIRUVANIYOOR, THIRUVANIYOOR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. V.B.PRADEEP, S/O.LATE BHASKARAN, VALIYATH MANGALATH HOUSE, THIRUVANIYOOR, THIRUVANIYOOR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. V.B.SUJATHA, W/O.SURESH, VALIYATH MANGALATH HOUSE, THIRUVANIYOOR, THIRUVANIYOOR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. GOWDA SARASWATHA SEVA SANGHAM, FLOWER JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN 682 055. 6. V.K.INDIRA, W/O.LATE BHASKARAN, VALIYATH MANGALATH HOUSE, THIRUVANIYOOR, THIRUVANIYOOR VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R4 ADV. SRI.K.R.MOHANAN R5 BY ADV. SMT.R.RANJINI R6 BY ADV. SRI.ANUP T PAUL THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & K.T.SANKARAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------- R.F.A.NO. 403 OF 2008 E and C.M.APPL.NO.1200 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th September, 2008 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph, J. C.M.Appl.No.1200 of 2008 is an application for condoning the delay of 1022 days in filing the appeal. The judgment is dated 31.1.2005. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the application that due to an inadvertent omission on the part of the counsel who appeared before the court below, the copy of the judgment was applied for only on 27.9.2007. There is no supporting affidavit of the advocate. Be that as it may, it is seen that despite posting of the matter for receiving the copy on 7.11.2007, the same was received only on 2.12.2007. For that also there is no explanation. Though the matter was delayed, it is seen that it was again sent for legal opinion. It is not clear as to when it was sent. But it is stated that the same was received by the counsel on 1.4.2008. The appeal was filed on 19.4.2008. In a case which was already delayed by several months, it is seen that the appellant has taken around four months to get the legal opinion. There is absolutely no explanation for the period of delay. Be that as it may, it is a case of electrocution. There is no evidence on the part of the R.F.A.NO.403 OF 2008 AND C.M.APPL.NO.1200 OF 2008 :: 2 :: second defendant/appellant, whereas it has come out in evidence that the accident was only due to the negligence on the part of the second defendant/appellant. That apart, it is seen from the counter affidavit filed by the plaintiffs/respondents 1 to 4 that they have already received the amounts from the court. 2. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we do not find any justification in condoning the delay and considering the appeal on merits. Therefore, the application for condoning the delay in filing the appeal is dismissed. Consequent on the dismissal of the application for condoning the delay in filing the appeal, the appeal is also dismissed. (KURIAN JOSEPH) Judge (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/