The appellant, who was out of the count for a delay of 2283 days and failed to appear in court or pay costs, had his appeal dismissed for default.
The appeal was dismissed for default due to non-appearance and non-payment of costs.
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 ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 23RD ASHADHA, 1945 F.A.O. NO. 105 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 10.02.2016 IN I.A.NOS.801 AND 802 OF 2015 IN O.S.NO.58 OF 2014 OF THE SUB COURT, KANNUR APPELLANT/PETITIONER/DEFENDANT:
THAIKANDY DHANESH AGED 34 YEARS, S/O NARAYANAN, KEEZHUR AMSOM, PUNNAD DESOM, KEEZHURE, TALIPARAMBA KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN – 670703. BY ADV T.MANOJ KUMAR
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:
SAJU P. JOHN, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O JOHN, PONNAPALLIL, PULPALLI, VADIKAVALA WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN – 673579.
THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2
F.A.O.No.105 of 2022
JUDGMENT
P.G. Ajithkumar, J.
The defendant in O.S.No.58 of 2014 on the file of the Sub Court, Kannur, is the appellant. The respondent filed the suit seeking a decree of specific performance. The suit was decreed exparte on 21.10.2014. The appellant had filed I.A.Nos.801 of 2015 and 802 of 2015 for condonation of delay and to set aside the exparte decree. The Sub Court allowed those applications on payment of a costs of Rs.5,000/-. The appellant, however, failed to make payment of the said amount. Accordingly, the Sub Court dismissed both those applications on 10.02.2016. Challenging that order, the appellant has filed this appeal, invoking the provisions of Order XLIII, Rule 1(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
3
F.A.O.No.105 of 2022
respondent. The appellant did not turn up during the last posting date and today.
In the said circumstances, this appeal is dismissed for default.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE
Sd/-
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE
dkr
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an appeal filed in default due to non-appearance and non-payment of costs should be allowed or dismissed
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Thaikandy Dhanesh
Saju P. John
Anil K. Narendraan
P.G. Ajithkumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
