Rita Paul vs Govinda Paul
2025 Latest Caselaw 414 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Rita Paul vs Govinda Paul on 9 May, 2025

                                                                           Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010186272023




                                                                    undefined

                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2499/2023

            RITA PAUL
            W/O GOBINDA PAUL, D/O RISHIKESH PAUL, R/O HAPPY VALLEY,
            MADANRITING, SHILLONG, PIN- 793021, DIST.- EAST KHASI HILLS, P.O.-
            MADANRITING, P.S.- MADANRITING MEGHALAYA, PIN- 793021.



            VERSUS

            GOVINDA PAUL
            S/O LT. BALORAM CH. PAUL, VILL.- SIRAJULI PATHAR, MAUZA-
            DHEKIAJULI, P.O.- DHEKIAJULI, P.S.- DHEKIAJULI, PIN- 784110, DIST.-
            SONITPUR, ASSAM.



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MS. S B CHOUDHURY, MR. S K DAS,A G CHOUDHURY

Advocate for the Respondent : MR B PUSHILAL, MR S PANDIT




             Linked Case :

            XXXXXXX
            W/O GOBINDA PAUL

            D/O RISHIKESH PAUL

            R/O HAPPY VALLEY
            MADANRITING
            SHILLONG
                                                                       Page No.# 2/4

           PIN- 793021
           DIST.- EAST KHASI HILLS
           P.O.- MADANRITING
           P.S.- MADANRITING MEGHALAYA
           PIN- 793021.


           VERSUS

          XXXXXXX
          S/O LT. BALORAM CH. PAUL

          VILL.- SIRAJULI PATHAR

          MAUZA- DHEKIAJULI

          P.O.- DHEKIAJULI
           P.S.- DHEKIAJULI
           PIN- 784110
           DIST.- SONITPUR
          ASSAM.


          ------------
          Advocate for : MS. S B CHOUDHURY
          Advocate for : appearing for XXXXXXX



                                BEFORE
              HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA

                                      ORDER

Date : 09.05.2025

1. Heard Ms. S. B. Choudhury, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Pushilal, the learned counsel for the respondent. Also interacted with the petitioner, Smti Rita Paul as well as the opposite party, Shri Govinda Paul, in camera.

2. This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has been filed by the petitioner for condoning the delay of 147 days in preferring the connected Matrimonial Appeal, wherein the petitioner has impugned the Ex-

Page No.# 3/4

parte judgment and order dated 13.12.2022 and decree dated 19.12.2022 passed by the learned District Judge, Sonitpur in Title Suit (M) Case No.101/2019, whereby a decree of restitution of conjugal right has been passed in favour of the respondent-husband.

3. The petitioner has explained the reason for delay in preferring the connected Matrimonial Appeal in paragraph No. 2 of the application for condonation of the delay.

4. It is pertinent to mention herein that during the pendency of the instant proceeding, I found that there is a possibility of an amicable settlement between the parties and, therefore, I interacted with both the parties in camera.

5. The petitioner, who is the wife, is presently staying at Guwahati with her minor children, whereas the opposite party is a resident of Dhekiajuli, where he works in a Bank. Both of them are residing separately due to some matrimonial dispute, which arose between them about last seven years ago.

6. The petitioner has also filed a divorce suit in Shillong, where she was earlier staying. However, during interaction with the Court, the petitioner had stated that she intends to give good education to her children, therefore, she is staying at Guwahati. Whereas the opposite party has stated that he has purchased a plot of land with a house at Dhekiajuli, where he intends to stay with the petitioner and their children. He has also stated that in the last month, he visited the residence of the petitioner and had discussion with her and also met the children.

7. After interacting with the parties in person, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is a strong possibility of an amicable settlement between the parties and, therefore, it has requested both the parties to continue to meet each other.

Page No.# 4/4

8. The opposite party shall come to Guwahati to meet the petitioner and her children and, if agreed, he will also take the petitioner to show her the new plot of land, which he has purchased at Dhekiajuli.

9. As there is a possibility of amicable settlement, the learned counsel for the opposite party, Mr. B. Pushilal has submitted that he is not opposing the prayer for condoning the delay in preferring the connected Matrimonial Appeal.

10. Considering the grounds mentioned in Paragraph No. 2 of the application for condonation of the delay to be sufficient cause, which prevented the petitioner in approaching this Court in preferring the connected Matrimonial Appeal within time and also with a hope that as early as possible the parties would arrive in an amicable settlement, the delay of 147 days in preferring the connected Matrimonial Appeal is hereby condoned and this Interlocutory Application is allowed and disposed of.

11. Registry to register the connected Matrimonial Appeal and list the same for admission after two weeks, on a date to be fixed by it.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant