Allowed

Jaya Abhisheksing Hajari and Another v. Abhisheksing Jairajsingh Hajari

Bombay HC12 Dec 2024APPLN/3330/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Family Court Bench condoned a delay of 123 days in filing a Criminal Revision Application under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC. The applicants sought revision against the quantum of maintenance awarded to them as wife and son of the respondent.

What did the court decide?

The application for condonation of delay was allowed; the Criminal Revision was registered and listed for final disposal.

Jaya Abhisheksing Hajari and Another Vs Abhisheksing… — Maintenance and Alimony | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AUG:29394

¶2

910-APPLN-3330 of 2022.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3330 OF 2022 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 9224 OF 2022 WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 9224 OF 2022 WITH FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 21 OF 2022 WITH

¶6

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11648 OF 2022 IN FCA/21/2022

¶7

JAYA ABHISHEKSINGH HAJARI & ANR. VERSUS

¶8

ABHISHEKSINGH JAYRAJSINGH HAJARI

¶9

Advocate for applicant in APPLN/3330/2022 and advocate for respondent in FCA/21/2022 : Mr. Umesh Mitkari h/f. Mr. Mukul S. Kulkarni Advocate for Appellant in FCA/21/2022 and advocate for respondent in APPLN/3330/2022 : Mr. Digambar B. Shinde

¶10

CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL & PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR , JJ. DATE : 12.12.2024

¶11

PER COURT :

¶12

Heard both the sides in condonation of delay application.

¶13

The applicants, who were wife and son of the respondent, are

¶14

seeking condonation of delay of 123 days in filing this Criminal Revision Application under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the quantum of

¶15

maintenance awarded by the Family Court.

¶16

1/2

¶17

910-APPLN-3330 of 2022.odt

¶18

We have heard both the sides and perused application as also the affidavit-in-reply.

¶19

Considering the fact that by the impugned order is against the salary of Rs.77,000/- (Rupees Seventy Seven Thousand only), the petitioner have been granted maintenance of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) and Rs.7,000/- (Rupees Seven Thousand only) per month respectively.

¶20

Considering the grounds mentioned in the application coupled with the nature of the dispute, the delay is not inordinate. There is nothing to demonstrate that it has been caused with such precarious intention.

¶21

The application is allowed. The delay is condoned. Register the Criminal Revision and list alongwith the Family Court Appeal for final disposal on 17.01.2025.

¶22

( PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR J.) (MANGESH S. PATIL, J.)

¶23

jagdish/

¶24

2/2

Jaya Abhisheksing Hajari and Another v. Abhisheksing Jairajsingh Hajari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaya Abhisheksing Hajari and Another v. Abhisheksing Jairajsingh Hajari

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

Najiullaha Khan Fatahula Khan Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Yashpalsingh Rajendrasingh Chavan Vs Advaitanandji Chandrakiranji Saraswati

Shivaji Ramrao Alewad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

M/S Seva Automotive Pvt. Ltd. through Its Director Sanjeev Bafana Vs Union of India through Its Secretary and Others

Sudhakar Malba Davkare Vs the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Others

Kishanrao Jethuji Halde and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others