IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2011/15th Agrahayana, 1935 MACA.No. 1629 of 2006 ( ) -------------------------- AGAINST THE AWARD IN OPMV 703/2000 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, WAYANAD, KALPETTA DATED 16-05-2005 APPELLANTS/ (PETITIONERS): -------------------------------------------- PAULOSE @ SHIBU, S/O.MATHAI, AGED 23 YEARS, VALANKANDATHIL HOUSE, POST THRISSILERY ANAPPARA, KARTIKULAM VIA., MANANTHAVADY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.N.J.ANTONY RESPONDENTS (RESPONDENTS): ----------------------------------------------- 1. JISHU, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.CHANDRASEKHARA PILLAI, CHANDRODAYAM, VAKERI SULTHAN BATHERY TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT. 2. K.MAMMU, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN KARIYADANKANDY HOUSE, PUTHUSSERYKADAVU MANANTHAVADY TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., KALPETTA, POLICY NO.101601/31/050/11/14785/1999. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09-06-2011 ALONG WITH MACA NO. 1649/2006, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: jm/ P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------ R.P.No.996 of 2013 in M.A.C.A.No.1629 of 2006 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of November, 2015 ORDER Ramachandra Menon, J. This Review Petition arises from the verdict passed by this Court in M.A.C.A.No.1629 of 2006. This is filed with 856 days delay which is sought to be condoned by filing a petition. 2. The sequence of events discernible from the proceedings shows that the appeal was originally dismissed on 9.6.2011. Met with the circumstances, the same was sought to be restored by filing M.J.C.No.564 of 2013 with a petition to condone the delay of 856 days in filing the same. The matter came up for consideration before this Court on 6.12.2013. Then it was noted that the appeal was dismissed not for default, but for non-prosecution and in the said circumstances, observing that the proper remedy was to file a Review Petition, the M.J.C. was suo moto ordered to be converted as a Review Petition. The Bench also observed that, though there was no merit in the averments in the affidavit accompanying the petition, a lenient R.P.No.996 of 2013 in M.A.C.A.No.1629 of 2006 2 view was being taken to condone the delay. It was accordingly that the delay was condoned imposing a cost of 4,500/- to be ₹ paid to the Kerala State Mediation and Conciliation Centre. Subsequently, the review petitioner/appellant came up with I.A.No.106 of 2014 preferred in the appeal seeking to extend the time for payment of cost and to take steps in the appeal. The said application dated 10.1.2014 came up for consideration before the Court on 31.1.2014, when the time for deposit as ordered in the order dated 6.12.2013 was extended till 6.2.2014. Cost is not satisfied so far. No further petition for extension of time is filed. In such circumstances, we find there is absolutely no merit in seeking for further extension of time. The proceedings are dismissed accordingly. Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE Sd/- ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE skj