Sudhakar Bhagchand Laghane vs Savita Sudhakar Laghane
2021 Latest Caselaw 14917 Bom

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          BENCH AT AURANGABAD


                920 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4861 OF 2020
                         IN SAST/27655/2018

                   SUDHAKAR BHAGCHAND LAGHANE
                                 VERSUS
                      SAVITA SUDHAKAR LAGHANE
                                    ...
             Advocate for Applicants : Ms. Gaikwad Chaya E.
     Advocate for Respondent : Ms. Sangeeta S. Pahune Patil h/f S. N.
                     Pahune Patil, N. J Pahune Patil
                                    ...

                                    CORAM :   SMT.VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.
                                    DATE :    12-10-2021.

ORDER :

1. Present application has been filed for condoning the delay of 129

days in filing second appeal.

2. The applicant is the original petitioner in Hindu Marriage Petition

No.128 of 2014 filed before learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division,

Vaijapur, District Aurangabad. That petition was filed under Section 13

of the Hindu Marriage Act for the dissolution of marriage which came

to be dismissed on 15-03-2016. The applicant then approached

District Court, Vaijapur by filing Regular Civil Appeal No.27 of 2016. It

has been dismissed by District Judge-1, Vaijapur on 30-01-2018. He

want to file the second appeal, however, there is delay. Hence, this

2 CA 4861-2020

application.

3. It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the

applicant/appellant that the appellant approached the Advocate in

the second week of April 2018 and was instructed by the Advocate

to bring the file of the Lower Court as well as certified copies. Those

certified copies were received by him on 08-06-2018. Thereafter, he

was busy in the admission of his son and was taking care of his

ailing mother. He was also busy with his office work and, therefore,

could not approach the Advocate again in time. It was submitted on

behalf of the applicant that delay is unintentional and deserves to be

condoned.

4. The learned Advocate for the respondent strongly opposed the

application and submitted that this is nothing but another attempt

on the part of the applicant/appellant to harass the wife. It was

submitted that several other litigation have resulted against the

husband and though order is passed against him for paying

maintenance to the wife, he is not regularly paying it. The reason

that has been given is absolutely not sufficient much less reasonable

to condone the delay.

3 CA 4861-2020

5. At the outset, it is to be noted that the delay is stated to be

129 days only. In order to explain the said delay, in fact no

documentary evidence has been filed. Though it is stated that the

certified copies were received to the petitioner on 08-06-2018, the

certified copies which have been annexed to the petition appears to

have been received by the petitioner on 14-02-2018 as regards

appeal and then it appears that the copy with the Lower Court were

received on 06-06-2018. In fact, it was a simple exercise that the

First Appellate Court would be having the certified copies of the Trial

Court, they could have been taken back by keeping a copy of the

same on the record of the First Appellate Court and there was no

necessity to obtain certified copies of the Judgment and decree of

the Trial Court once again. This appears to be not the advise given

by the Advocate to the appellant. Though strictly speaking the delay

appears to be not explained properly, yet taking into consideration

the liberal approach that is required to be taken by this Court, the

delay deserves to be condoned. However, the inconvenience that

would be caused to the respondent deserves to be compensated in

terms of money.

6. Further, it has been stated that maintenance @ Rs.20,000/-

4 CA 4861-2020

per month has been awarded to the wife by the Court and it is not

paid. Taking into consideration this statement, the cost would be

suitably awarded. Hence, the following order.

ORDER

1) The civil application stands allowed and disposed

of.

2) The delay caused in filing second appeal stands

condoned subject to deposit of cost of Rs.20,000/-

(twenty thousand) within a period of 15 days from today.

3) After the amount is deposited, Registry to verify

and register the second appeal and the amount be given

to the respondent.

(SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI) JUDGE

vjg/-