Gujarat High Court
Pavan Dahyabhai Patel vs Puja @ Vaishnavi D/O Narendrabhai Mali ... on 11 September, 2025
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4349/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 4349 of
2025
In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 19334 of 2025
================================================================
PAVAN DAHYABHAI PATEL
Versus
PUJA @ VAISHNAVI D/O NARENDRABHAI MALI W/O PAVANBHAI PATEL
================================================================
Appearance:
MR ASHISH M DAGLI(2203) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
DS AFF.NOT FILED (R) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE NOT RECD BACK for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE THROUGH SPEED POST NOT RECEIVED BACK for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
===============================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
Date : 11/09/2025
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 78 days in
preferring the appeal against the order dated 31.12.2024
passed by the learned Family Court No.2, Vadodara in
Family Suit No.611 of 2018.
2. It is reported that rule issued by this Court under
order dated 21.08.2025 is served and learned advocate
Mr.Jugal Bharat Chauhan has instructions to appear on
behalf of respondent. Registry to reflect the name of
learned advocate for the respondent.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4349/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/09/2025
undefined
3. Learned advocate has drawn attention of this Court
to the contents of para 3 to 6 of the application, wherein it
stated that the delay has occurred as the applicant was
facing severe difficulties and process of engaging
advocate took some time. Thereafter, the applicant
received certified copy, paid requisite Court fees and
professional fees, which resulted in further delay as the
same has to be arranged.
4. Therefore, learned advocate has drawn attention of
this Court to the reasons for which delay has occurred.
5. Learned advocate for the respondent formally
opposes the grant of application.
6. Considering the aforesaid, particularly, period of 78
days of delay, the Court is of the view that considering the
facts involved in the case, delay cannot be treated as
inordinate.
7. Considering the submissions and the contents of the
para mentioned hereinabove, the delay is also explained
sufficiently.
8. 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/4349/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/09/2025
undefined
deciding application for condonation of delay was
discussed.
9. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed.
The delay of 78 days caused in preferring the appeal
against the order dated 31.12.2024 passed by the learned
Family Court No.2, Vadodara in Family Suit No.611 of 2018
is hereby condoned. Rule is made absolute to the
aforesaid extent. Registry is directed to list the main
appeal in due course.
(A.Y. KOGJE, J)
(NSSG,J)
SIDDHARTH
