Gauhati High Court
Xxxxxxxxxx vs Xxxxxxxxxx on 20 November, 2024
Author: S. K. Medhi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Medhi
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010096052024
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1532/2024
XXXXXXXXXX
S/O HAIDAR HUSSAIN LASKAR,
VILL.- MAZUMDERBAZAR, TATAPUR PART-VI, P.O.-TARAPUR PART- VI,
P.S.- SILCHAR, DIST.- CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 788003.
VERSUS
XXXXXXXXXX
D/O AZIR UDDIN LASKAR,
VILL.- TUPKHANA PART- I, P.O.- ARUNACHAL, P.S.- SILCHAR, DIST.-
CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 788025.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M S MAZUMDER,
Advocate for the Respondent : MS. R CHOUDHURY, MR. Z. HUSSAIN,MS. B. HAZARIKA
In Mat. App./3869/2024
WITH Mat. App./3869/2024 (Filing Number)
Page No.# 2/3
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA
ORDER
20.11.2024
(S. K. Medhi, J)
1. The instant Interlocutory Application has been filed under
Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay. The
same has been filed in connection with a challenge made to a
judgment dated 17.11.2023 passed by the learned Principal Judge,
Family Court, Cachar, Silchar in F.C.(Crl.) Case No. 42/2021 which
has been made by way of an appeal. After issuance of notice in the
Interlocutory Application, the opposite party has entered
appearance.
2. We have heard Shri AMS Mazumder, learned counsel for the
applicant as well as Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the
opposite party.
3. Ms. Choudhury, the learned counsel, by referring to Section
19 in the Family Courts Act, 1984, more particularly, Section 19 (2)
has submitted that no appeal lies from the order which has been
passed under Chapter IX of the Cr.P.C.
4. The instant challenge is against an order passed under the
aforesaid provision of Chapter IX of the Cr.P.C.
5. In view of the above, the appeal is not maintainable.
6. At this stage, Shri Mazumder, learned counsel for the
applicant submits that he may be allowed to withdraw the appeal
Page No.# 3/3
and make the challenge in the appropriate manner prescribed by
law. He has also submitted that since the appeal itself was barred by
time for which the Interlocutory Application has been filed, some
observations may be made on that aspect.
7. After hearing, the appeal is allowed to be withdrawn with
liberty to make the challenge in the manner prescribed.
8. It is needless to state that the applicant may take recourse
to Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, apart from the grounds
taken in the present Interlocutory Application for condonation of
delay which would be liable for consideration. We also direct the
Registry to hand over back the certified copy of the order dated
17.11.2023 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court,
Cachar, Silchar in F.C.(Crl.) Case No. 42/2021 which was annexed to
the appeal.
9. We make it clear that since objections were filed in the
Interlocutory Application, the consideration of any application that
may be filed for condonation of delay would be decided strictly in
accordance with law and without being influenced by an observation
made by us.
JUDGE JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
