A party must exercise due diligence in legal proceedings, as excessive delay in filing a review petition, without sufficient grounds, cannot be condoned.

ORDER :

M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM, J.

1. This is an Application to condone the delay of 2704 days in filing the Review Petition. The Review is filed by the Addl. Petitioner No.2 in the Writ Petition, who was impleaded in the Writ Petition as one of the legal heirs of the original Writ Petitioner who died during the pendency of the Writ Petition. The other legal heirs of the Original Writ Petitioner are Respondent Nos.11 to 13 herein and were Additional Petitioners Nos.3 to 5 in the Writ Petition. The Respondents Nos.1 to 6 are the official Respondents and the Respondents Nos.8 to 10 herein are the legal heirs of one Thomas who purchased the building and machinery of the industrial unit of the Original Writ Petitioner in auction conducted by the Kerala Financial Corporation and who are awarded the lease of the industrial land allotted to the Original Writ Petitioner, after cancellation of the allotment.

2. The Application is opposed by the Respondent No.3 and the Respondent Nos.9 & 10 by filing separate Counter Affidavits in C.M. Application No.1/2025 to condone the delay opposing the C.M. Application and also raising contention objecting to the review on merits.

3. W.P.(C) No.11911/2007 was disposed of by the impugned judgment dated 23.03.2018. Thereafter, the Petitioner herein filed R.P. No.1016/2019 and the same was dismissed as per the Order dated 06.01.2020. This is the Second Review Petition filed by the Petitioner to review the impugned judgment.

4. The short facts necessary for disposal of this Application alone as revealed from the pleadings and records are stated: The Writ Petitioner, namely, P.R. Cicily Mathew, was allotted 46 Cents of land in an Industrial Estate at Edayar in Ernakulam District as per Letter of Allotment dated 14.07.1983 issued by the Respondent No.1/General Manager, District Industries Centre, under Hire Purchase. The Writ Petitioner availed a loan from the Respondent No.7/Kerala Financial Corporation (KFC) and constructed a building and installed machinery and established a pickle manufacturing unit in the allotted land. When the Writ Petitioner defaulted on payment of the loan to the KFC, the KFC initiated proceedings against the Writ Petitioner and in such proceedings, the building and machinery were sold in public auction and one Thomas purchased the building and machinery in public auction. The KFC issued a Sale Certificate in favour of Thomas. On payment of the land value as per the Hire Purchase Agreement, Patta was granted to the Writ Petitioner on 05.05.1994. The said Patta was cancelled as per Order dated 15.06.1995 by the Tahsildar, North Paravur Taluk, on the ground that prior sanction was not obtained from the Government. Thereupon, the Respondent No.1 issued Order dated 24.07.1995 cancelling the allotment in favour of the Writ Petitioner. The Respondent No.1 issued Communication dated 08.08.1995 to the Sub Collector, Fort Kochi, requesting to resume the land allotted to the Writ Petitioner on the ground that the unit of the Writ Petitioner was attached and sold by the KFC. The Writ Petitioner filed O.P. Nos.4453/1996, 12887/1995 and 18448/1997 challenging the aforesaid Orders cancelling the Patta and allotment, and the Orders in resumption proceedings and the said Writ Petitions were dismissed by this Court. The Writ Petitioner filed W.A. Nos.774, 775 & 946 of 1998 before the Division Bench of this Court, and those Appeals were disposed of by judgment dated 23.02.2005, directing the District Collector to look into the grievance of the Writ Petitioner after affording an opportunity of being heard to the Writ Petitioner. Pursuant to the said direction, the District Collector passed Order dated 03