Court allowed condonation of 79 days delay in filing an appeal. Appeal registered and listed for hearing. In matrimonial dispute arose, court directed parties to appear on next date for settlement.
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.
Ajay Kumar vs. Manju Kumari.
CMP(M) No.823 of 2022.
03.08.2022. Present:
Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate, for the applicant/appellant.
Mr. Rajesh Parkash, Advocate, for the respondent.
CMP(M) No.823 of 2022.
By medium of this application, the applicant/appellant has sought condonation of 79 days’ delay that has crept up in filing of the appeal. Learned counsel for the respondent states that he has no objection to condone the aforesaid delay. Accordingly, the application is allowed and delay condoned. The application stands disposed of.
Appeal be registered.
FAO(FC) No. of 2022.
Since, the instant proceedings emanate out of a matrimonial discord, therefore, it is incumbent upon this Court to make an endeavour to have the matter amicably settled. Let both the parties remain present before this court on the next date of hearing.
List on 16.11.2022.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge
(Chander Bhusan Barowalia) August 03, 2022. Judge (krt)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to condone delay of 79 days in filing appeal
Whether to register the appeal and list it for hearing
Ajay Kumar
Manju Kumari
Tarlok Singh Chauhan
Chander Bhusan Barowalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
