IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2008 / 2ND ASHADHA 1930 RSA.No.461 of 2008 (E) ---------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN A.S.298/06 & AS.308/2006 of DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM OS.79/1998 of MUNSIFF COURT, PARAVUR .................... APPELLANT/APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF ------------------------------------------ JIJI, W/O. SAGAR, THUNDATHIL, CHERAI MURI, PALLIPPURAM VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.LIJU. M.P SRI.G.PADMARAJ RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT: ------------------------------------------------- CHAVARO, S/O. OUSO, PUKKATTU, CHERAI MURI, PALLIPURAM VILLAGE KOCHI TALUK, ERNAKULAM. THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.P.BALACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------------------------ C. M. Application No.388 of 2008 & R. S. A. No.461 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT This is an application for condonation of delay of 197 days in filing the R.S.A. The judgment under appeal was delivered on 09/03/07. Copy of the said judgment was applied for on 09/04/07; stamp papers called for were produced in time and copy was delivered on 14/08/07. It is the case of the appellant that the appeal ought to have been filed on or before 16/09/07, but is actually filed only on 11/04/08 with a delay of 197 days. The reasons assigned for the delay is contained in paragraph 4 of the affidavit and it is to the effect that for the last several months, he is facing unfortunate incidents in his family affairs and he was not at all in a position to move around and could not meet his counsel and give necessary instruction to file the above R.S.A in time and it is thus, that a R. S. A. No.461 of 2008 -2- delay of 197 days occurred in filing the above appeal. It is not mentioned or disclosed as to what was the unfortunate incident which rendered her not in a position to move around. On such bald averment, the delay of as much as 197 days cannot be condoned. The appellant is a woman aged 44 years and there is no whisper in the affidavit as to whether she was suffering on account of any illness. Without assigning any just and sufficient cause to have the delay condoned, the delay of as much as 197 days in filing the appeal cannot be condoned so as to adversely affect the rights of the successful party. In the result, I dismiss this C.M.Application for condonation of delay of as much as 197 days in filing the R.S.A. Consequently, the R.S.A also stands dismissed. K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JUDGE kns/-