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 21ST MAY 2009 / 31ST VAISAKHA 1931 Mat.Appeal.No. 70 of 2004(B) ---------------------------- OP.33/1998 of FAMILY COURT,KOZHIKODE .................... APPELLANT (PETITIONER IN THE OP): ------------------------------------------ V.K.AMBUJAM, AGED 41 YEARS, D/O. BALAN, RESIDING AT D.C.P. QUARTERS, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.RAVISANKAR RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN THE OP): -------------------------------------- K.K.C.BABU, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. KELAPPAN, KONDUKUNIYIL HOUSE, KADALOOR AMSOM, DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI FOR R1 SRI.P.R.SREEJITH SRI.K.B.SAJEESH SRI.C.S.SUNIL THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- MAT.APPEAL NO.70 OF 2004. ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MAY, 2009 J U D G M E N T Basant, J. In the light of the order in C.M. Application No.819/04, this appeal is dismissed as barred by limitation. R.BASANT, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- C.M.APPLN.NO.819 OF 2004 IN MAT.APPEAL NO.70 OF 2004 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MAY, 2009 O R D E R Basant, J. The appellant-divorced wife has preferred an appeal along with a petition to condone the delay of 1819 days. The marriage took place on 4.9.1983. It was dissolved on 31.1.1997 by a decree for divorce passed by the Subordinate Judge, Thalassery on the ground of cruelty. In 1998, an application was filed by the divorced wife for return of gold ornaments. That application was dismissed by an order on merits, dated 24th September, 1998. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant prays that a lenient view may be taken and the long delay of 1819 days may be condoned. The reason urged is that the appellant- divorced wife was ill and was laid up and could not do the needful on account of her illness. 3. The application is opposed by the respondent. It is C.M.APPLN.NO.819/04 2 pointed out that there is no justifiable reason to condone the inordinate delay of 1819 days. 4. We have considered the relevant circumstances. Of course, Annexure A certificate has been produced. But, we are not satisfied that there is sufficient reason to condone the long and inordinate delay of 1819 days in filing the appeal. The conclusion appears to be irresistible from the totality of circumstances that the appellant did not intend to file an appeal and is now attempting to keep the dispute alive by filing this belated appeal. 5. This petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed. R.BASANT, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn