The Court allowed the Appellant's petition for condoning delay in filing an appeal against an order rejecting a plaint. Condoning the 89-day delay with Rs. 2000 costs as the Appellant's husband underwent surgery and suffered medical distress.
Petition allowed; delay condoned on payment of Rs. 2000 costs by the Petitioner to the Respondent within ten days.
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.
CMP.No.8193 of 2024 in A.S.SR.No.42209 of 2024
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP,J.
The learned Counsel for the Respondent vehemently objects to the affidavit of the Petitioner. The Plaintiff had instituted the Suit seeking declaration to declare the release deed as null and void after thirty years. The Defendant in the Suit is none other than the sister-in-law of the Plaintiff who is a widow, had filed a Petition under Order VII Rule 11 (a) and (d) and Section 151 of CPC seeking rejection of Plaint. After due enquiry, the Petition was allowed. Against which, this Appeal had been filed.
1/5
2/5
the Respondent submitted that the Petition has no merit and has to be dismissed in the light of the reported ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding exercising discretion regarding delay in filing Appeal or any proceedings. The party affected has to explain clearly each date of delay. Here, it is not the case. It is vague. Therefore, this Petition has to be dismissed. It is the further submission of the learned Counsel for the Respondent that the Suit filed by the Plaintiff itself is not maintainable. The widow/sister-in-law had filed the Suit after thirty years, only to settle scores based on ego in the family and for seeking money. Therefore, it shall not be continued in Appeal.
3/5
imposing costs of Rs.2000/- on the Petitioner. The Petitioner is directed to pay Rs.2000/- to the Respondent within a period of ten days from today.
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP.J.,
This Petition is allowed accordingly.
14.11.2024
dh
Note: Registry is directed to number the Appeal, if it is otherwise in order.
CMP.No.8193 of 2024 in A.S.SR.No.42209 of 2024
4/5
5/5
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay in filing the appeal is condonable given the medical illness of the appellant's husband.
Whether the explanation of the appellant regarding the delay is sufficient despite vagueness.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Appellant
Respondent
Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
