O R D E R

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner states on instructions that no settlement has taken place between the parties. She requests that the matter may be permitted to be argued on merits.

2. Leave granted.

3. The appellant-decree holder in a civil suit instituted by him against the respondent-judgment debtor, is aggrieved by the order dated 16th October, 2019, passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the year 2012, the appellant had instituted a civil suit1 against the respondent before the learned Sub-Judge at Ernakulam for recovery of a sum of ₹5,50,931/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Fifty Thousand Nine Hundred and Thirty One) along with interest. On 20th December, Signature Not Verified

2014, the aforesaid suit was decreed in favour of the appellant. On 12th October, Digitally signed by KAVITA PAHUJA Date: 2024.08.28

16:13:28 IST Reason:

1 OS No. 456/2012

2017, the appellant filed an Execution Petition seeking execution of the aforesaid decree. The respondent participated in the said proceedings. In fact, in the course of the said proceedings, vide order dated 23rd November, 2018, on an application moved by the appellant, the Executing Court had appointed a Local Commissioner to measure and demarcate 5 cents of the land owned by the respondent, in discharge of the decretal amount standing against him.

5. On 20th March, 2019, the respondent filed an appeal2 against the aforesaid order.

Accompanying the said appeal, was an application3 for condonation of delay of 1460 days. The said application has been allowed by the learned Single Judge under the impugned order with an observation that it was just and proper to condone the delay of 1460 days in filing the appeal and the delay has been satisfactorily explained.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the judgment and decree was passed in favour of the appellant on 20th December, 2014. The time for preferring an appeal against the said judgment and decree would have expired on 20th March, 2015. The respondent filed an appeal only on 20th March, 2019, with a delay of 1460 days. The only explanation offered by the respondent was that his properties were attached by the Income Tax department in connection with a land dealing and he was facing proceedings under the SARFAESI Act and therefore, could not give attention to filing of the appeal within the period of limitation prescribed in law.

2 RFA No. 180/2019

3 CMA No. 1/2019

7. We are of the opinion that the impugned order is extremely cursory and does not give any reason that weighed with the Court for condoning a prolonged delay of 1460 days. All that the impugned order has done is to quote paragraph 3 of the affidavit filed by respondent along with the application for condonation of delay, which is neither here nor there.

8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the impugned order cannot be sustained. The same is accordingly, quashed and set aside. The application seeking condonation of delay is restored for a fresh hearing by the learned Single Judge. Parties shall appear for the said purpose before the learned Single Judge on 12th September, 2024.

9. The present appeal is allowed and disposed of on the above terms, while leaving the parties to bear their own expenses.

………...………………......J.

[HIMA KOHLI]

……....……………….......J.

[SANDEEP MEHTA]

NEW DELHI AUGUST 13, 2024

PS

ITEM NO.28 COURT NO.9 SECTION XI-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 2786/2020 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 16-10-2019 in CMA No. 1/2019 passed by the High Court Of Kerala At Ernakulam)

N.G. VIJAYAN NAIR PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS MARTIN SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S) Date : 13-08-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA For Petitioner(s) Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Manu Krishnan, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. D