IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 1ST OCTOBER 2009 / 9TH ASWINA 1931 Mat.Appeal.No. 509 of 2009(B) ---------------------------- ORDER DATED 31.12.2007 IN O.P.NO.658/2007 OF THE FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM ............................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT --------------- ABOOBACKER, S/O.MOHAMMED MOLLA, KORMATH HOUSE, KADAMBODE-PO PANTHALLUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU RESPONDENT : PETITIONER --------------- SOUDHA, D/O.MUHAMMED, VADAKKETHODI HOUSE, MUTHUVATHPARAMBE HAJIYARPALLI-PO MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------ C.M.Appl.No.1722 of 2009 & Mat.Appeal No.509 of 2009 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of October, 2009 ORDER/JUDGMENT BASANT, J. This application is to condone the delay of 391 days in filing a matrimonial appeal. The appeal in turn is directed against an exparte order directing payment of an amount of Rs.1,84,000/- along with interest and cost. To a pointed query by this Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that an application to set aside the exparte order was filed and the same has already been dismissed. That order remains unchallenged. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that he has no instructions from the respondent and the respondent has not produced before him a copy of the order dismissing the application to set aside the exparte order. We do, in these circumstances, take the view that the long delay of 391 days in filing the Matrimonial Appeal is not validly explained. The delay does not deserve to be condoned. C.M.Appl.No.1722 of 2009 for condonation of delay is hence dismissed. Consequently the Mat.Appeal No.509 of 2009 shall stand rejected as barred by limitation. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) rtr/-