Kerala High Court
State Of Kerala vs M.Unnikrishnan Nair on 6 October, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
Wednesday, the 6th day of October 2021 / 14th Aswina, 1943
CM.APPL.NO.1/2020 IN LA.APP. NO. 51 OF 2020
LAR 516/2010 OF THE II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
---
APPLICANTS/APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS IN L.A.R.:
1.STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2.THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT DIVISION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/CLAIMANT IN L.A.R.:
M.UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, BANKUVILA VEEDU, KALADY,
REPRESENTED BY M.GOPINATHAN NAIR (POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER),
SIVAPURI, T.C.50/561, KALADY-683574.
Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the
affidavit filed therewith the High Court be pleased to condone the delay
of 1625 days in filing the above appeal.
This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the application
and the affidavit filed in support thereof, and upon hearing the arguments
of GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the petitioners, the court passed the following:
P.T.O.
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------
C.M Appln No.1 of 2020
in
LAA No.51 of 2020
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of October, 2021.
ORDER
The application is filed to condone the delay of
1625 days in filing the appeal.
2. The petitioner has in the affidavit filed in
support of the application stated that although the
award was pronounced on 28.02.2015, the Government
Pleader applied for the copy of the judgment only on
15.12.2018 and the certified copy was collected on
23.01.2019. Subsequently the District Collector ordered
an appeal to be filed against the impugned judgment.
The same was received by the office of the Advocate
General only on 22.07.2019. Thereafter, the
Government Pleader required for additional information
from the petitioner. In the process, a delay of 1625 days
has occurred in filing the appeal.
LAA No.51 of 2020
3. Heard the the learned counsel appearing for the
parties.
4. The law in respect of condonation of delay is
well settled in a plethora of decision.
5. In Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag &
Anr v. Katiji & Ors [(1987) 2 SCC 107], the Hon'ble
Supreme Court has held that the expression 'sufficient
cause' is adequately elastic to enable the courts to apply
the law in a meaningful manner which sub-serves the
ends of justice and that a liberal approach has to be
adopted while dealing with applications for condonation
of delay.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Oriental Aroma
Chemical Industries Ltd v. Gujarat Industrial
Development Corporation and Another [ (2010) 5
SCC 459] has held that Court shall adopt a liberal
approach in condoning the delay of short duration and a
LAA No.51 of 2020
stricter approach where the delay is inordinate.
7. It is conceded by the petitioner that although the
impugned judgment was passed on 28.02.2015, the
application for the copy of the judgment was made only
on 15.12.2019. Thereafter, finally the appeal was
presented only on 03.12.2019. I am not fully satisfied and
convinced of the reasons stated in the affidavit in support
of the application. However, taking a lenient view in the
matter in order to afford the petitioner an opportunity to
contest the case on merit, I am of the opinion that the
delay can be condoned by directing the petitioner to pay
cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the
Kerala Legal Services Authority within a period of three
weeks from today.
In the result, the application is allowed on the
following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall deposit an amount of
Rs.5,000/- as costs before the Kerala Legal
LAA No.51 of 2020
Services Authority, within a period of three weeks
from today, and file a memo to the effect.
(ii) Only if the memo is filed within the
prescribed time, the application will stand allowed
and the delay will stand condoned, otherwise, the
application will stand dismissed.
Post the appeal after three weeks.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
rkc
06-10-2021 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
