Dismissed

Smt. Soni v. Vinod Kumar Gupta

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2023FAPLD/448/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal was dismissed when the High Court found no merit. The appellant sought to challenge a Family Court order rejecting a restitution of conjugal rights application based on delay. The appellate court noted the marriage had been dead for over a decade due to separation and failure to appear in prior proceedings, finding no good ground for interference.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed. Condonation of delay not justified.

Smt. Soni Vs Vinod Kumar Gupta — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:229101-DB

¶2

Court No. - 39

¶3

Case :- FIRST APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 448 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Smt. Soni Respondent :- Vinod Kumar Gupta Counsel for Appellant :- Kameshwar Singh,Sudhanshu Kumar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J. Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶6

In re : C.M. Delay Condonation Application No. 02 of 2023.

¶7

The appeal has been presented carrying a short delay of 06 days.

¶8

Cause shown sufficient.

¶9

The delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

¶10

The application is allowed.

¶11

Order on Appeal.

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record.

¶13

Present appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, arising from the order dated 09.08.2023 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Ballia, in Misc. Case No. 58 of 2019 (Soni Vs. Vinod Kumar Gupta). By that order, the learned court below has rejected the application filed by the applicant under Order IX Rule 13 CPC on the ground of delay.

¶14

Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record, we find no good ground to offer any interference. Undisputedly, the parties were married in the year 2011. The respondent instituted the proceeding for dissolution of marriage in the year 2014. The order sheet of the learned court below records

¶15

that service was effected. Yet, the appellant never appeared in the proceeding before the learned court below. In such circumstances, by ex-parte judgment and order dated 19.05.2015, the learned court below had dissolved the marriage between the parties. More than 4 years thereafter, an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC was filed along with an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act, on 04.12.2019.

¶16

Thus, undisputedly, parties were living separately for a long period of time. On query made, learned counsel for the appellant fairly states, appellant never instituted any proceeding for restitution of conjugal rights. Though she was living separately from her husband since 2014-15, no efforts were made to appear in the divorce case proceedings. 5 years thereafter she instituted the restoration application but still she did not file any proceeding for restitution of conjugal rights. Plainly, marriage between the parties is dead for more than a decade. The reason for condonation of delay has rightly been disbelieved. The learned court below has rightly not felt satisfied as to the sufficiency of the reason seeking condonation of delay.

¶17

In the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case noted above, we find no merit in the appeal. It is accordingly dismissed.

¶18

Order Date :- 4.12.2023 SA

¶19

(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.) (S.D. Singh, J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SALMAN ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Soni v. Vinod Kumar Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Soni v. Vinod Kumar Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manu Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Union of India and 3 Others Vs Ramesh Giri

Union of India and 4 Others Vs Banarasi and Another

Pankaj Chaubey Vs Shruti Chaubey

Pankaj Gautam Vs Smt Vandana Devi

Vijay Kumar Pandey Vs Union of India and 2 Others