Smt. Bina vs Sunil Kumar
2022 Latest Caselaw 22828 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 3
 

 
Case :- FIRST APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 373 of 2022
 

 
Appellant :- Smt. Bina
 
Respondent :- Sunil Kumar
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Shravana Kumar Yadav
 

 
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.

Hon'ble Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi,J.

(Order on Delay Condonation Application No.1 of 2022)

Heard learned Counsel for the defendant-appellant.

This appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 has been filed beyond limitation by 1233 days, along-with delay condonation application and affidavit.

The defendant-appellant has disclosed the reasons in paragraph nos . 1 to 5 of the affidavit accompanying with the delay condonation application for delay of 1233 days in filing the appeal which is reproduced below:

"1- That the deponent is the sole appellant in the instant first appeal and fully conversant with the facts of case as such doing pairvi of the case himself.

2- That the counsel for the deponent did not inform about the progress of the case and the divorce petition was allowed exparte.

3- That on 10.8.2022 the deponent heard in the village and the case was decided in favour of the husband.

4- That on 12.9.2022 she contracted her counsel, he made inquiry from the office and came to know about the exparte judgment and decree passed in the suit. The counsel applied for the certified copies and obtained the same on 14.9.2022.

5- That the appeal is being filed without any further delay. The delay in filing the appeal may be condoned and the appeal may be treated as within time otherwise the appellant will suffer irreparable loss and injury."

From the impugned judgment it is evident that the defendant-appellant appeared in the case and filed a written statement being paper no. 19 Ka. Thus, it cannot be said that the impugned judgment dated 3.5.2019 in Case No. 7609 of 2011 (Sunil Kumar Vs. Smt. Bina) has been passed without any opportunity of hearing. The defendant-appellant participated in the divorce case, but subsequently did not appear. Perusal of the aforequoted affidavit accompanying the delay condonation application clearly shows that the defendant-appellant has completely failed to offer any acceptable explanation for such long delay of 1233 days.

Under the circumstances, the delay cannot be condoned. Therefore, the delay condonation application is rejected. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed.

Order Date :- 23.12.2022

M. Tarik