Ayisha v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.HARILAL FRIDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015/17TH ASWINA, 1937 RP.No. 823 of 2015 () IN MFA.91/2002 -------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN MFA 91/2002 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 28.02.2008 REVIEW PETITIONER/3RD APPELLANT IN M.F.A:
-------------------------------------------- AYISHA D/O.BAPPUTTY, P.O.KOTTARAKUNNU, VIA-VELLAMUNDA WYNAD DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT KALLAMPALLL HOUSE PURAKKAD.P.O., AMBALAPPUZHA(VIA), ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT PIN-688 561.
BY ADV. SRI.C.M.KAMMAPPU RESPONDENT/RESPONDENTS:
-----------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. THE CUSTODIAN AND CONSERVATION OF FORESTS OLAVAKKODE CIRCLE, "ARYA BHAVAN", FOREST COMPLEX RAILWAY COLONY, OLAVAKKODE, PALAKKAD.
3. PATHUTTY W/O.BAPPUTTY, P.O.KOTTARAKUNNU, VIA-VELLAMUNDA WYNAD DISTRICT.
4. ALI, AGED 42 YEARS S/O.BAPPUTTY, P.O.KOTTARAKUNNU, VIA-VELLAMUNDA WYNAD DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT CHERIYA THAYYIL KUMMANKODE, NADAPURAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
5. MUHAMMED S/O.BAPPUTTY, P.O.KOTTARAKUNNU, VIA-VELLAMUNDA WYNAD DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT M R QUARTERS P.O.PANOOR, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT.
6. NURUDHIN S/O.BAPPUTTY, P.O.KOTTARAKUNNU, VIA-VELLAMUNDA WYNAD DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT THEKEYIL HOUSE MUTHAVALOOR, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
R.P. NO. 823 OF 2015 :2:
7. REHMATH D/O.BAPPUTTY, P.O.KOTTARAKUNNU, VIA-VELLAMUNDA WYNAD DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT KALLUVEETTIL HOUSE KOARANGAD.P.O., T T MUKKU, VALIAPPIL THAMARASSERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
R1 AND R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. R. PADMARAJ R3 TO R7 BY SRI.V.V.SURENDRAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09-10-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON & K. HARILAL, JJ.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C.M. Appln No. 3140 of 2015 and R.P. No. 823 of 2015 in M.F.A. No. 91 of 2002 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 9th day of October, 2015
O R D E R
Ramachandra Menon, J.
This review petition is stated as filed being aggrieved of the verdict dated 28.02.2008 in M.F.A. No. 91 of 2002 passed by this Court.
There is a delay of 2734 days in filing the review petition and hence the same is sought to be condoned by filing C.M. Appln. No. 3140 of 2015.
2. The explanation offered, as it appears from paragraph 3 of the affidavit filed in support of the C.M. Application, reads as follows :
"I submit that the above MFA was filed in the year 2002. Thereafter the case was pending before this Court for a period of 6 years. The case was finally heard on 28.02.2008 and this Hon'ble Court dismissed
: 2 :
the M.F.A. as per the impugned order. However, the appellants were unaware about the dismissal of the appeal. I am an uneducated lady and could not understand the intricacies involved in the proceedings before this Hon'ble Court. Hence, I was of the bonafide belief that our counsel will intimate us the status of our appeal in time. But, in the month of November, 2014 when I approached our counsel who was representing us in the above appeal and enquired about the status of the appeal, he told me that the appeal had already been dismissed. He also told me that though he tried to contact us, but he failed in his attempts. The communications sent by him also had not received by me due to change in the residential address.
Immediately on coming to know about the order of this Hon'ble Court, I asked our counsel about the further course of action to be taken in the matter and on his advise I approached a counsel practising in the Hon'ble Supreme Court for preferring an appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the said order of this Hon'ble Court. He in fact told me to obtain the certified copy of the lower court order and records.
: 3 :
arrangements to obtain the certified copies as required by the counsel. On receipt of the certified copies of the document and again approached the counsel. He on perusal of the records advised me to file a review petition before this Hon'ble Court as there is an error apparent on the face of the order passed by this Hon'ble Court. But, in the meantime, due to financial stringencies I could not give necessary instructions to the counsel to file review petition. Hence there occurred a delay of 2734 days in filing the above Review Petition. There is no willful latches or negligence on my part in not appearing this Hon'ble Court on time. But, the delay was occurred only due to the unavoidable circumstances stated above."
3. Heard the learned counsel for the review petitioner at length.
4. After hearing and after going through the contents of the affidavit filed in support of the application, we find that the explanation offered for the delay of 71⁄2 years in filing the review petition is not liable to be reckoned as a reason at all; much less a satisfactory explanation. There is no merit in the C.M. Appln.
: 4 :
Accordingly, the C.M. Application stands dismissed and as a natural consequence the review petition as well.
Sd/- P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE sd/- K. HARILAL, JUDGE kmd /True copy/ P.A. to Judge