IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 24TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 2ND ASWINA 1931 RP.No. 758 of 2009() ---------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN RSA.1334/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT NO.1: ------------------------------------------------------------ V.D. EDWARD, S/O. DEVASIA, VARIKATTU HOUSE, KARAPUZHA KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.V.G.ARUN MR.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENTS/APPELLANT AND RESPONDENTS 2 TO 6: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. KUNJUMUHAMMED, OLAYALAPARAMBIL HOUSE HOUSE NO. 11/52, NOVELTY LADIES STORES, OLD MUNICIPAL BUS STAND KOTTAYAM. 2. SMT. FATHIMA BEEVI, D/O. KUNJU BHAVA, NEDUMPARAMBIL HOUSE, PERUNNA KIZHAKKEKKARA CHANGANACHERI. 3. A.M. JAMALUDHIN, ARAKULAPARAMBU, THAZHATHANGADI, KOTTAYAM VILLAGE. 4. SMT. MOLY NINAN, TRAFFIC ASSISTANT INDIAN AIR LINES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. MOBI NINAN, C/O. SMT. MOLLY NINAN INDIAN AIRLINES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. JUBY NINAN, C/O. SMT.MOLLY NINAN INDIAN AILINES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME U P FOR ADMISSION ON 24/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P. 758 OF 2009 IN R.S.A. NO. 1334 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 24th day of September, 2009 O R D E R This R.P. is filed to review the judgment passed in R.S.A.1334/08 by this Court. The suit was one for partition and a preliminary decree was passed. Thereafter a final decree petition was filed which also ended in passing of a final decree and against that decision with a petition to condone the delay an appeal was preferred before the District Judge, Kottayam as A.S.230/00. Thereafter, as hearing the petition to condone the delay was dismissed, the appeal was also dismissed. It is challenging that decision the second appeal has been preferred. At the time of admission itself without giving notice to the respondent this Court remitted the case for fresh consideration regarding the condonation of delay. Or in other words the direction of this Court was to consider I.A.1327/00 the dismissal of which resulted in dismissal of the appeal. It is against that decision R.P. 758 OF 2009 IN R.S.A. 1334 OF 2008 -:2:- the respondents in the appeal have filed a review application. Now it is submitted that they do not have much objection in condoning the delay but they insist for a direction that the Court should hear the appeal A.S.230/00 as expeditiously as possible. I feel when the matter has been disposed of on technical ground of condonation of delay and as there is no serious objection for the other side in condoning the delay and hearing the appeal on merits the best course is to allow the petition to condone the delay and direct the District Court to hear the appeal itself at the earliest. In the result the judgment passed by this Court on 4.3.2009 is reviewed and I.A.1327/00 pending before the District Court, Kottayam for condonation of delay in O.S.230/00 is allowed and the learned District Judge is directed to consider the appeal on merits and dispose it of as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a period of four months from the date of first appearance of the parties. The Review Petition is allowed and the appeal is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-