This regular second appeal was heard by the High Court of Kerala. The court dismissed a delay petition and subsequently dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation.
Appeal dismissed as barred by limitation.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 17TH BHADRA 1932
RSA.NO. 530 OF 2010()
--------------------{AS.134/2007 OF I ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM IN OS.363/2004 OF II ADDL.M.C., ERNAKULAM}
APPELLANT (S): APPELLANT /PLAINTIFF
M.P.THOMAS, S/O.PAILY, AGED 65 YEARS, MATTEKKAT HOUSE, C.P.UMMER ROAD, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADV. SRI.R.PREMCHAND
SMT.DILSHA PREMCHAND
RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS /DEFENDANTS
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/09/2010, THE COURT ON 08/09/2010 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.
-------------------------------------------R.S.A.No.530 of 2010
-------------------------------------------Dated this the 8th day of September, 2010
JUDGMENT
The delay petition (C.M. Application No. 346 of
barred by limitation.
Sd/(S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN) JUDGE
sk/-
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal is barred by limitation.
M.P. Thomas
Elizabeth @ Bava
Francis @ Benny
Xavier @ Babu
Thomas
S.S.Satheesachandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
