IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 16438 of 2005(F)
1. CHOLA SAHIDA, D/O.AHAMMEDKUTTY HAJI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THRIKKARIYOOR DEVASWOM, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. THRIKKARIYOOR DEVASWOM, FIT PERSONS
3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
For Petitioner :SRI.SAJU.S.A
For Respondent :SRI.A.P.CHANDRASEKHARAN (SR.)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Dated :16/01/2008
O R D E R
Pius C. Kuriakose, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C) No. 16438 of 2005
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 16th day of January,2008
JUDGMENT
Counsel for the petitioner is not available. Ext.P3 order
passed by the Land Reforms Appellate Authority condoning delay,
which has been caused in the matter of filing the appeal by
respondents 1 and 2, is under challenge. The delay was inordinate,
i.e., 28 years, two months and 28 days. The appellate authority has
condoned the delay without imposing any condition keeping in mind
certain decisions of the Supreme Court and this Court which would
justify a liberal approach while considering applications for
condoning the delay. Though the ultimate order allowing the
application for condoning the delay can be justified, in my opinion,
the appellate authority should have imposed reasonable terms for
condoning the inordinate delay.
2. In the circumstances, the impugned order is modified by
incorporating a condition that respondents 1 and 2 pay a sum of
Rs.2,500/- by way of costs to the writ petitioner within two months
from today. If costs is not paid, the impugned order will stand set
WPC 16438/05 2
aside and the application for condoning the delay stand dismissed. If
the costs is not paid, the impugned order will stand confirmed.
The petition is allowed to the above extent.
Pius C. Kuriakose,
Judge.
mn.