Gujarat High Court
Maherben @ Bismila W/O Maheshbhai Dabhi ... vs Maheshbhai Semabhai Dabhi on 7 July, 2025
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2626/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 2626 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 12290 of 2025
================================================================
MAHERBEN @ BISMILA W/O MAHESHBHAI DABHI D/O RAHEMAN KHAN
PATHAN
Versus
MAHESHBHAI SEMABHAI DABHI
================================================================
Appearance:
MS RAKSHA S KHATED(12987) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
Date : 07/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE)
1. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 157 days in preferring the appeal against the judgment and order dated 05.08.2024 passed by the learned Family Court,. Gandhidham, Kutch in Family Suit No.100 of 2024.
2. It is reported that the rule is served however, none has appeared on behalf of the respondent.
3. Learned advocate has drawn attention of this Court to the contents of para-3 to 5 of the application, wherein it stated that the delay of 157 days has occurred because of non-service of summons as the applicant could not attend Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by SIDDHARTH(HC01065) on Tue Jul 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 08 23:26:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/2626/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 undefined the proceedings as she was not aware about the same. The applicant has compelling reasons for not being able to file the appeal within the statutory time and the delay has occurred in filing the appeal.
4. Therefore, learned advocate has drawn attention of this Court to the reasons for which delay has occurred.
5. Considering the aforesaid, particularly, period of 157 days of delay, the Court is of the view that considering the facts involved in the case, delay cannot be treated as inordinate.
6. Considering the submissions and the contents of the para mentioned hereinabove, the delay is also explained sufficiently.
7. A reference in this regard may be made to the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of Sheo Raj Singh (Deceased) through Legal Representatives and others vs/. Union of India and Another, reported in, (2023) 10 SCC 531, wherein the term "Sufficient Cause" was interpreted and the approach of Courts while deciding application for condonation of delay was discussed.
8. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. The delay of 157 days caused in preferring the appeal against the judgment and order dated 05.08.2024 passed by the learned Family Court, Gandhidham, Kutch in Family Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by SIDDHARTH(HC01065) on Tue Jul 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 08 23:26:28 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/2626/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/07/2025 undefined Suit No.100 of 2024. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(A.Y. KOGJE, J) (NSSG,J) SIDDHARTH Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by SIDDHARTH(HC01065) on Tue Jul 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jul 08 23:26:28 IST 2025