This order allows an application to condone a 166-day delay in filing a revision petition against a Family Court judgment. The court found sufficient cause but awarded costs to the respondent.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
949 sr.no..odt
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
949 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2383 OF 2023
IN REVNST/6414/2023
DEVENDRA S/O SHIVAJI AATHKHILE
VERSUS
VANDANA DEVENDRA AATHKHILE AND ANOTHER
Advocate for Applicant : Ms. Jamdhade Maya Ramrao
Adv. for Respondents: Mr. G.G. Suryawanshi.
CORAM : S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
DATE : 1st SEPTEMBER, 2023
ORDER :-
By way of present application the applicant seeks to condone
the delay of 166 days caused in filing the revision application against the
judgment and order dated 3.10.2022 pased by the Family Court, Nanded
in Petition E-125/2020.
2.Ms. Jamdhade, learned advocate appearing for the applicant
would submit that the impugned order is passed behind the back of the
applicant. He was not aware about the order. As soon as he came to
know about the order, necessary steps were taken for obtaining certified
copy, then the present application is filed. The applicant has a strong case
on merit. Therefore, it would be appropriate to condone the delay
considering the challenge on merit.
3.Mr. Suryawanshi, learned counsel for respondent strongly
{2}
949 sr.no..odt
opposes the prayers. He would submit that the applicant has
conveniently avoided to attend the court when he was served with the
notice of the proceeding before the family court The delay of 166 days
is not at all explained. Therefore, he submits that the application
deserves to be rejected.
4.Having considered the submissions advanced, and the
reasons stated in para.5 to 7 of the application, sufficient cause is made
out. However, it would be appropriate to compensate the respondent by
saddling some costs. Hence, the order :-
O R D E R
[I]The application is allowed.
[ii]The delay of 166 days caused in filing the revision
applicant is condoned, subject to condition that the applicant deposits an
amount of Rs. 3,000/- (rupees three thousand only) with the Family
Court, Nanded, within a period of 3 weeks.
[iii]On deposit of said amount respondent shall be entitled
to withdraw the same.
[iv]Place the matter for further consideration on
15.9.2023.
[S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR]
JUDGE
grt/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether sufficient cause is made out for condoning a delay of 166 days in filing a revision application despite non-attendance at court hearings.
Whether costs should be awarded to the respondent upon condonation of delay.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Devendra S/o Shivaji Aathkhile
Vandana Devendra Aathkhile And Another
S.G. Chapalgaonkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court