P.R. Dhanya v. Anandhan
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court dismissed a regular second appeal challenging the lower appellate court's refusal to condone a 1426-day delay in filing the first appeal, finding no sufficient cause and no substantial question of law.
What did the court decide?
The regular second appeal was dismissed without being admitted.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945
RSA NO. 425 OF 2022
AGAINST THE DECREE AND JUDGMENT DATED 16.03.2022 IN
A.S.NO.100/2021 ON THE FILES OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT-IV,
PALAKKAD AROSE FROM THE DECREE AND JUDGMENT DATED 20.12.2017 IN
O.S.NO.195/2013 ON THE FILES OF THE MUNSIFF’S COURT, CHITTUR
APPELLANT/APPELLANT/DEFENDANT:
P.R. DHANYA
AGED 38 YEARS, D/O PADMANABHA PILLAI, KALAVARA VEEDU,
PUDUNAGARAM AMSOM AND DESOM, KARIPPODE P.O.,
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678503
BY ADVS.
M.R.ARUNKUMAR
P.SHAMMI NAVAS
A.FRANCIS
P.T.BINDURAJ
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether sufficient cause was shown to condone a delay of 1426 days in filing the first appeal?
Whether a substantial question of law arises for admission of the second appeal under Section 100 CPC?
Parties & counsel
- appellant
P.R. Dhanya
- respondent
Anandhan
Coram
A. Badharudeen
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court