IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 7TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 16TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 24507 of 2008(S) -------------------------- OP.251/2006 of FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- O.SURENDRAN, 36, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, OTHAYANGOTTU VEEDU, VELLIKKUNNU AMSOM DESOM, TIRURANGADI. BY ADV. SRI.HARISH R. MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- PATHIYAMPARAMBIL SHYMA, D/O.THANKA, AGED 26, PO.ARIYALLUR, MALAPPURAM. ADV. SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI FOR R1 SMT.C.G.PREETHA FOR R1 SMT.P.RANI DIOTHIMA FOR R1 SRI.ARJUN SREEDHAR FOR R1 SRI.S.ANISH FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 24507 of 2008(S) A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14/05/2008 IN I.A.NO.266/2008. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED IN I.A.NO.267/2008 DATED 14/05/2008. \\TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE P.R.Raman & T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C) No.24507/2008-S ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 7th day of November, 2008. J U D G M E N T Raman, J. The petitioner filed O.P.No.251/2006 before the Family Court, Malappuram seeking divorce against the wife. On the appointed day when the case was posted, he did not appear and the OP was dismissed for default. Subsequently, he filed I.A.No.267/2008 for restoration along with I.A.No.266/2008 for condoning the delay in filing the restoration petition. There is a total delay of 373 days in filing the restoration application. The only ground urged for condonation of delay was that he obtained a job at Mumbai and gone there, and hence, he could not attend the court and when he came back to Kerala, in execution of an order for maintenance, he was arrested and remanded. This was denied by the wife in her counter affidavit. To support the plea raised in the petition for condonation of delay no evidence was adduced. In such circumstances, the court had no alternative but to dismiss the petition for condonation of delay. Even before this Court in the writ petition, the petitioner has not been able to improve his case by producing any materials. In the circumstances, we are unable to W.P.(C) No.24507/2008 -:2:- find that the order passed by the court below is in any way illegal or not. We find no merit in this writ petition. The same is accordingly, dismissed. (P.R. Raman, Judge.) (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms