Courts Cannot Impose Condition To Deposit Part Amount Covered By Verdict Impugned As Prerequisite To Condone Delay In Filing Appeal: Kerala HC
The Kerala High Court observed that while considering a delay petition, Courts cannot impose a condition to deposit part of the amount covered by the verdict impugned as a prerequisite to condone delay in filing an appeal.
The Court set aside the judgment of the Appellate Court that dismissed the condonation of delay petition merely on the ground the petitioner had not complied the direction to deposit the amount.
A Single Bench of Justice A. Badharudeen observed, “While considering a delay petition, a court is not expected to direct deposit of any amount covered by the verdict appealed and the duty of the court is to address whether sufficient cause shown to condone the delay, with a view to dispose of the delay petition. Imposing such a condition is not legally permissible. Therefore, while considering a delay petition the court cannot impose a condition to deposit part of the amount covered by the verdict impugned, as a prerequisite to condone delay in filing an appeal.”
Advocate V.T. Madhavanunni appeared for the revision petitioner, while Sr P.P. Renjit George represented the respondents.
The Bench had to determine whether a court can impose a condition to deposit part of the amount covered by the verdict impugned, as a prerequisite to condone delay in filing an appeal.
The revision petitioner (husband) submitted that the appeal has been filed challenging the orderof the Magistrate granting compensation and maintenance to the respondent (wife).
The Court noted that the delay condonation petition was dismissed mainly for non compliance of the order directing payment of arrears of maintenance. Consequent to dismissal of the delay petition, appeal also was dismissed.
The Bench explained that while considering a delay petition, a court is not expected to direct deposit of any amount covered by the verdict appealed and the duty of the court is to address whether sufficient cause shown to condone the delay, with a view to dispose of the delay petition. “Imposing such a condition is not legally permissible,” the Court added.
Consequently, the Court held, “Therefore, dismissal of the delay petition and the appeal by the Appellate Court as per the judgment in Crl.A. No.102/2019 and order in Crl.M.P. No.2721/2019 dated 12.11.2019 are illegal and the same stand set aside.”
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition.
Cause Title: Ramesh V.V v. Jyothi Maruthiyodan & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024:KER:54443)
Appearance:
Revision Petitioner: Advocates V.T. Madhavanunni and.V.A.Satheesh
Respondents: Sr P.P. Renjit George