IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RFA.No. 95 of 2008()
1. N.PURUSHOTHAMA PAI
... Petitioner
Vs
1. MRS. JENIE RAMANAND, W/O.LATE RAMANAND
... Respondent
2. MRS. RAJANI, W/O.K.C.RAMESH, 38 YEARS
3. MRS. RANJANIE, W/O.LAKSHMI NARAYANAN
4. MRS. RANJISHA, W/O.S.KRISHNAKUMAR
5. NARAYANA PAI, MUNDASSERRY HOUSE
6. VASUNDHARA SARVOTHAMAN
For Petitioner :SRI.K.SUDHAKARAN(PALAKKAD)
For Respondent :SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI (SR.)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Dated :03/04/2009
O R D E R
PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J.
------------------------
R.F.A.No.95 OF 2008
------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2009
JUDGMENT
Smt.N.E.Bindu, learned counsel for the appellant draws my
attention to I.A.No.1335/2009 and seeks adjournment, so that
her senior Smt.Umamurthi can address me on the I.A. .
2. I have already heard both sides in C.M.Appln.No.306/2008, which was an application for
condonation of the inordinate delay of 2979 days caused in the
matter of filing the appeal and dismissed that application by my
order dated 18/11/2008. Nevertheless, I did not reject the
appeal straight away on the reason that the application for
condonation of delay was dismissed. I posted the appeal to
31/3/2009 observing that; “in the meanwhile, it is open to the
petitioner appellant to sort out the issue with the respondents by
paying sum of Rs.10 Lakhs or any other agreed amount to the
respondents by cash in full and final settlement of the
respondents’ share in the decree schedule property. The
RFA No.95/2008 .2.
learned Subordinate Judge will post the final decree proceedings
to a day after 31/3/2009″.
It is agreed by both sides that the issue has not been sorted
out between the parties. The RFA, therefore, will stand rejected
on the ground of delay.
PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE
dpk