Dismissed¶8

Surabhi Padhy v. Biswaranjan Padhy

Delhi HC26 Nov 2025MAT.APP.(F.C.)/432/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Surabhi Padhy v. Biswaranjan Padhy; MAT.APP.(F.C.) 432/2024; CM APPL. 7331/2025 and 7332/2025 (condonation of delay); High Court of Delhi; decided 26.11.2025; maintenance pendente lite; Section 24 Hindu Marriage Act 1955; Sections 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(ib) divorce decree dated 07.09.2024; Section 125 Cr.P.C. maintenance Rs. 60,000 per month (Judgment 24.04.2025); enhancement application disposed; inordinate delay of 731 days in filing and 27 days in re-filing; appeal dismissed as inappropriate to keep pending; Family Court Dwarka; interim maintenance Rs. 35,000 per month.

What did the court decide?

This Court took into account that the present Appeal was filed with an inordinate delay of approximately more than 730 days. ¶8

Surabhi Padhy Vs Biswaranjan Padhy — Maintenance and Alimony | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~68

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- MAT.APP.(F.C.) 432/2024, CM APPL. 7331/2025 (Delay of 737 days in filing the Appeal) & CM APPL. 7332/2025 (Delay of 630 days in Re-filing the Appeal)

¶4

SURABHI PADHY .....Appellant

¶5

Through: Mr. C. S. Panda, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

BISWARANJAN PADHY .....Respondent Through: Ms. Aparna Bhat, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Karishma Maria, Adv.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

¶10

O R D E R % 26.11.2025

¶11

This matter is taken up today as 25^th November, 2025, was declared a holiday on account of the 350^th anniversary of „Guru Teg Bahadur‟s Martyrdom Day‟.

¶12

The present Appeal assails the correctness of the Order dated 22.10.2022 passed by the learned Family Court, Dwarka, New Delhi. By way of the Impugned Order, the learned Family Court, while disposing of an application filed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 [“ Act ”], granted maintenance pendente lite at the rate of Rs. 35,000/- per month.

¶13

The Appeal is accompanied by two applications, the first seeks condonation of the delay of 737 days in filing the Appeal, whereas the second seeks condonation of the delay of 630 days in re-filing the

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 08/12/2025 at 11:50:54

¶16

Appeal.

¶17

However, the record reflects that the Appeal was filed, impugning the Order dated 22.10.2022, on 22.10.2024. The Registry of this Court marked defects, and eventually, the Appeal was listed on 18.12.2024. Thereby, there was a delay of 731 days in filing the Appeal; and further, the Appeal was re-filed and listed after 57 days, i.e., with a further delay of 27 days in re-filing.

¶18

This Court also notes that, in the meantime, the petition filed under Section 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(ib) of the Act seeking a decree of divorce was adjudicated, and a decree of divorce was granted by the learned Family Court vide Judgment dated 07.09.2024. 6. During the course of arguments, it was further submitted that the Appellant had filed an application before the learned Family Court seeking enhancement of the maintenance fixed by the Impugned Order. It was also submitted that the said application was disposed of by the learned Family Court while pronouncing the Judgment dated 24.04.2025 in the petition filed by the Appellant under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 [“ Cr.P.C. ”], seeking a direction to the Respondent to pay maintenance.

¶19

The said petition was allowed vide Judgment dated 24.04.2025, directing, inter alia , the Respondent to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 60,000/- per month.

¶20

Since the application for enhancement of the maintenance amount, as well as the petition under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., have been adjudicated upon, this Court does not find it appropriate to keep the present Appeal pending, while also keeping in mind the facts that the present Appeal was filed with an inordinate delay of approximately more than 730 days. Accordingly, this Appeal is

¶21

This is a digitally signed order.

¶22

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 08/12/2025 at 11:50:54

¶23

dismissed.

¶24

The present Appeal, along with pending application(s), if any, is disposed of in the above terms.

¶25

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

¶26

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. NOVEMBER 26, 2025/ v /va

¶27

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 08/12/2025 at 11:50:54

Surabhi Padhy v. Biswaranjan Padhy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surabhi Padhy v. Biswaranjan Padhy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lalit Chaudhary Vs Shweta Nagar

Sonali Jain Vs Dheeraj Chauhan & Anr.

Prakriti Sharma Vs Yashodhar Sharma

Sh. Pawan Singh Negi Vs Smt. Bhawana Bhakuni

Kanika Kandhari Vs Rishi Kandhari

Pawan Kumar Sidhu Vs Smt Purnima

Gurjeet Kaur Vs Gurmeet Singh

Sheetal Joshan Roy Vs Soumyajit Roy

Capri Global Capital Limited Vs Himanshu Malhotra

Naresh Bansal and Ors. Vs Adjudicating Authority and Anr.

Lalit Chaudhary Vs Shweta Nagar

Shraddha Gupta Vs Sumit Jain

Mrs. Madhu Verma & Anr. Vs Mr Vinod Rajoria & Ors.

Arushi Krishna Dasgupta Vs Gourov Dasgupta