The High Court of Orissa dismissed the revised petition for appellate maintenance under O.A. 230 of 2017 as barred by limitation due to a delay of over two years in filing the appeal.
The RPFAM is dismissed being barred by limitation.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK RPFAM No. 253 OF 2017
Manoj Kumar Moharana @ Manoj …. Petitioner Moharana
None
-versus-
Tulasi Moharana and others …. Opp. Parties
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
Order No.
ORDER 24.04.2023 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. None appears for the Petitioner at the time of call. 3. Order dated 23rd April, 2011 (Annexure-1) passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar in Crl. Proceeding No.24 of 2011 (CMC No.93 of 2010) is under challenge in this RPFAM, whereby the Petitioner has been directed to pay maintenance of Rs.6,000/- per month to the Opposite Parties from the date of filing of the petition, i.e., from 8th September, 2010.
ms
(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge
Page 1 of 1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the revised petition for appellate maintenance is barred by limitation.
Whether the High Court can condone the delay in filing the RPFAM.
Manoj Kumar Moharana @ Manoj Moharana
Tulasi Moharana and others
K.R. MOHAPATRA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
