IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2008 / 23RD ASHADHA 1930 RSA.No. 414 of 2008 --------------------------------- AS.381/2005 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC-I), ERNAKULAM OS.493/1989 of MUNSIFF COURT, PERUMBAVOOR .................... APPELLANT/APELLANT/PLAINTIFF: JANARDANAN NAIR, S/O.SIVASANKARAN NAIR, KOTTUKUNNEL HOUSE, NELLAD KARA, MAZHUVANNOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.P.P.BIJU RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS: 1. DASAN NAIR, S/O.KESAVAN NAIR, MANGATTU HOUSE, NELLAD KARA, MAZHUVANNUR VILLAGE. 2. SATHYAPALAN, S/O.RAGHAVAN NAIR, MANGATTUPUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE, NELLAD KARA, MAZHUVANNUR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN K.GEORGE SRI.K.S.ARUN KUMAR THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.P. Balachandran, J. --------------------------- C.M.Appl.No.327 of 2008 & R.S.A.No.414 of 2008 --------------------------- JUDGMENT This is an application seeking for condonation of delay of 42 days in filing the appeal. Condonation of delay is vehemently opposed by the counsel for the respondent on the ground that the appellant has only casually explained the delay without the details, so as to enable counting of the days and the laches on each count is not furnished in the affidavit and that the reasons stated are also not grounds on which delay of 42 days in filing the appeal can be condoned, especially when there is no explanation at all as to why the Regular Second Appeal was filed only on 11.4.2008, though all the difficulties to file appeal were over by 27.2.2008 and the court fee payable and paid in the appeal was only Rs.30/-. 2. It is seen that the judgment assailed was pronounced on 22.9.2007 and that by the judgment, RSA 414/08 2 the decree of the court below was being confirmed. It is against the concurrent decrees that this appeal is filed. 3. The judgment assailed was pronounced on 22.9.2007. Copy thereof was applied for on 25.9.2007. Stamp papers called for on 27.10.2007 were produced on 29.10.2007. Copy was taken delivery of on 7.11.2007, but, still, the appeal is filed only on 11.3.2008. From 7.11.2007, at least, on any day, the appeal could have been filed without waiting till the last day, as contended by the counsel for the respondents. 4. The case of the appellant is that he was seriously laid up due to chickenpox during the months of January and February; that since 22.1.2008 he was totally bed ridden and that only by 27.2.2008, he could move freely. It is not discernible as to how, if at all, he was seriously laid up due to chickenpox during the months of January and February, namely for two months and how RSA 414/08 3 he could be totally bed ridden on account of chickenpox from 22.1.2008 till 27.2.2008, namely, for more than one month. Though he says that he was affected with viral fever also, it is not stated as to whether the viral fever was in continuation of chickenpox. In any event, as pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondents, from 7.11.2007 till 22.1.2008 there was no difficulty for him to file an appeal. The appellant, who did not file any appeal till then and who explains that he was laid up from 22.1.2008 till 27.2.2008, should have filed appeal immediately thereafter, especially when, the time to prefer appeal had already expired. But, on the other hand, the appeal is filed only on 11.3.2008. As rightly contended by the counsel for the respondents, there is no just and sufficient cause shown for not filing the appeal in time and there is no explanation also for each day's delay. RSA 414/08 4 In the result, refusing to condone the delay of 42 days in filing the appeal, I dismiss this C.M. Application.Consequently, the Regular Second Appeal filed against the concurrent findings of the courts below also stands dismissed. 14th July, 2008 (K.P.Balachandran, Judge) tkv