Disposed

Dr. Mayuri W/O Eshan Nerkar v. Dr. Eshan S/O Narendra Nerkar

Bombay HC6 Aug 2024CAO/947/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Wife sought condonation of a 55-day delay in filing an appeal against an ex parte divorce decree, citing her studies and counsel's lapse. The court adopted a liberal approach and condoned the delay. It admitted the appeal and allowed amendment of the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 55 days condoned; appeal admitted with notice; amendment of appeal allowed within a week.

Dr. Mayuri W/O Eshan Nerkar Vs Dr. Eshan S/O Narendra… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1 915.cao.946.2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶3

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.946 OF 2024 FAMILY COURT APPEAL ST. NO. 4720 OF 2024

¶4

Dr. Mayuri w/o Eshan Nerkar

¶5

..vs..

¶6

Dr. Eshan s/o Narendra Nerkar

¶7

- - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶8

¶9

Shri N.A. Waghmare, Advocate h/f Shri P.B. Patil, Advocate for the applicant.

¶10

CORAM: VINAY JOSHI AND MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J J. DATED : 06/08/2024.

¶11

Heard.

¶12

This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 55 days caused in filing the appeal to challenge the decree of divorce dated 30.11.2023 passed by the Family Court in petition No.A-274/2023.

¶13

The non-applicant husband has filed said petition seeking a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion. It reveals from the record that the applicant wife has appeared in the proceedings however she did not file written statement, and thus, resultantly without contest a decree of divorce has been passed.

¶14

Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that at the relevant time, the applicant was taking Education in Manipal University, State of Karnataka, and therefore, was not aware about the proceedings. It is submitted that the Counsel has not informed the dates and there was misconception about

¶15

2 915.cao.946.2024

¶16

the period of limitation, which lead to cause delay.

¶17

Considering the ground canvassed and the rights involved in the proceeding, the matter needs to be looked upon. We are aware that the non-applicant is not before us, still it is consistent view that, while considering the delay condonation application, the Court shall adopt a liberal approach for advancements of justice and it shall not be thwarted on mere technicalities.

¶18

Having regard to all above facts including length of delay, the application is allowed. Delay stands condoned. The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶19

FAMILY COURT APPEAL ST. NO.4720/2024

¶20

Heard.

¶21

ADMIT .

¶22

Issue notice to the respondents, returnable after four weeks.

¶23

Call for the Records and Proceedings.

¶24

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 947 OF 2024

¶25

Heard.

¶26

This is an application seeking amendment in the appeal.

¶27

The applicant seeks to add certain grounds in

¶28

3 915.cao.946.2024

¶29

support of the appeal. Since the notice has not been yet served on the respondent, the additional ground can be incorporated.

¶30

In view of that, the application is allowed. Amendment be carried out within a week, and thereafter, notice along with the amended plaint be issued to the respondent.

¶31

The application stands disposed of.

¶32

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.)

¶33

Trupti

Dr. Mayuri W/O Eshan Nerkar v. Dr. Eshan S/O Narendra Nerkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Mayuri W/O Eshan Nerkar v. Dr. Eshan S/O Narendra Nerkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhagyesh S/O Kiran Ghangare (Husband in Law) and 4 Others vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Ps, Koradi, Nagpur Tq. and Dist. Nagpur and Another

Shital Dinkar Bhagat Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Lakhandur, Tq. Lakhandur, Dist. Bhandara.

Nawal S/O Gowardhan Atram vs Pradnya @ Sejal Nawal Atram

Smt.Manjusha Laxmanrao Dhole and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Akola, Dist. Nagpur Railway and 1

Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction) Central Railway, Ajani, Nagpur Vs Smt. Kalpana W/O Parasram Ade and Others

Samrat Ashok Shah (Wrongly Mentioned as Samratsagar Shah in First Information Report) and 2 Others Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso, Ps, Akola, Dist. Nagpur (Raiway) and Another