PERUMAN BHAGVATHY DEVASWOM PERINADU Vs. BHARGAVI AMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) This appeal is by the appellant in Second Appeal No. 147 of 1993 on the file of the High Court of Kerala. During the pendency of the said appeal, the second respondent before the High Court, died on 17-4-2002. In that behalf, the appellant filed the following three applications on 9-10-2003 : (i) an application to set aside the abatement of the appeal against second respondent in the second appeal; (ii) an application to condone the delay in filing the said application to set aside the abatement; and (iii) an application to bring on record, the LRs of the deceased second respondent in the second appeal. The High Court, being of the view that the delay of 394 days was not satisfactorily explained, dismissed the application for condonation of delay as also the application for setting aside the abatement and consequently, dismissed the application for bringing the LRs on record, by three separate orders dated 5-10-2005. As the deceased second respondent in the second appeal was the sole plaintiff in the original suit from which the second appeal arose, the second appeal was closed on 5-10-2005, as having abated. The said four orders are challenged in this appeal by special leave.

(3.) The appellant contends that there was no negligence or laches on its part and it had satisfactorily explained the reasons for the delay which were due to circumstances beyond its control. The appellant, a Devoswom managed by a Committee, gave the following explanation for the delay: When the second appeal was filed in 1993, it was managed by an earlier Managing Committee. Later in a suit relating to the management of the Devoswom, the Sub-Court, Kollam appointed a Receiver to manage the Devoswom. Thereafter elections were held on 25-5-2003 and the newly elected Committee of Management assumed office on 8-6-2003. The new Committee of Management was unaware of the pendency of the second appeal and, therefore, not in a position to file necessary applications in time. The Committee came to know about the appeal only when it received a communication dated 7-9-2003 from the lawyer about the case. Thereafter it ascertained the particulars of the LRs. of the deceased and filed the applications on 9-10-2003.