Madan Kumar @ Avr Varshan v. R.Ramya

Crl.M.P.No.9625 of 2019 and Crl.R.C.(SR).No.31589 of 2019

Crl.M.P.No.9625 of 2019 and Crl.R.C.(SR).No.31589 of 2019

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA., J.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that despite service of notice on the respondent and her learned counsel, there is no appearance today and affidavit of service has also been filed and name of the respondent is also printed in the cause list. He would submit that during the pendency of this petition, the petitioner has paid Rs.50,000/- directly to the respondent in the open Court. He would submit that the petitioner suffered loss in his business and due to which he is suffering from mental depression thereby he was unable to comply with the order passed on merits.

2 Perusal of the records show that Court notice has also been served on the respondent . However, there is no representation.

3 Taking into consideration the facts and the submissions made by the

learned counsel, being satisfied with the grounds made in the affidavit, delay of 621 days is condoned. Accordingly, Crl.M.P.No.9625 of 2019 is allowed.

4 The Registry is directed to number the revision if it is otherwise in order.

05.11.2019