IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 23RD MAGHA 1929 AS.No. 908 OF 1997 -------------------- OS. 511 OF 1989 OF THE PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF: THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, VAIDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.JAMES KOSHY RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT: K.A. VARGHESE, SON OF AVERAH, CONTRACTOR, KIZHAKKEDATHU HOUSE, PANKODE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. (DIED) BY ADV. SRI.D.KRISHNA PRASAD SRI.D.NARENDRANATH THIS APPEAL SUIT HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.2.2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & V. K. MOHANAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = C.M. APPLN. 802/2003, I.A. NOS. 1307 & 1308/2003 & A.S. 908 OF 1997 = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2008. J U D G M E N T Raman, J. This appeal is filed by the Kerala State Electricity Board. The sole respondent died on 26.1.2000 and a memo was filed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent on 17th September, 2001. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition for condoning the delay, it is averred by the deponent that in fact a copy of the memo was not served on the standing counsel appearing for the appellant in the above appeal. 2. We have verified the memo filed before this Court and find that the then standing counsel appearing for the Board, on his own behalf, made an endorsement as "received copy" on 18.9.2001. That apart, this memo is also recorded by the court subsequently, ie. on 24.7.2003. Therefore, we find that the appellant had knowledge of the death of the respondent as early as in 2001 itself. Hence the explanation for the delay in filing the present petition is not at all satisfactory and in contrary to facts. Since no other reason is stated other than the one mentioned as above, we CM. APPLN. & A.S. 908/1997 :2: do not find sufficient reason to condone the delay. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. In view of the dismissal of the application for condonation of delay caused in filing the application to set aside the abatement, I.A. Nos. 1307 & 1308/2003 are also dismissed. Resultantly, the appeal also is dismissed as abated. P.R. RAMAN, (JUDGE) V. K. MOHANAN, (JUDGE) knc/- CM. APPLN. & A.S. 908/1997 :3: P.R. RAMAN & V.K. MOHANAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = C.M. APPLN. & A.S. 908/1997 J U D G M E N T 12TH FEBRUARY, 2008.