Sri Bhimasen Panda vs Smt. Saudamin @ Mini Panda @ Hota
2023 Latest Caselaw 13641 Ori

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                    MATA No.190 of 2022

             Sri Bhimasen Panda            .........          Appellant

                            Mr. Prasanta Kumar Satapathy, Advocate

                                      -Versus-

             Smt. Saudamin @ Mini Panda @ Hota
             and another               .........              Respondents

                                       Mr. Abhilash Mishra, Advocate

                  CORAM:
                               JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
                               JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

                                            ORDER

03.11.2023 Order No.

10. 1. Mr. Satapathy, learned advocate appears on behalf of applicant

appellant-husband. He submits, his client is aggrieved by judgment dated

22nd December, 2021 made by the family Court, enhancing the

maintenance by an additional Rs.15,000/- per month. His client was

prevented from filing appeal within the time prescribed. Application has

been made for condonation of delay. The delay be condoned and the appeal

admitted for hearing.

2. Mr. Mishra, learned advocate appears on behalf of respondent-wife.

He submits, there is no explanation given in the application regarding how

applicant was prevented from filing the appeal in time. He draws attention

to paragraph 3 in the application to point out the omission. The paragraph

is reproduced below.

"3. That the order was passed on 22.12.2021. The petitioner gathered knowledge about the judgment after receiving notice in execution case vide Execution Case no.1/2022. The conducting lawyer did not inform him about the judgment. After receipt of the notice in execution case he immediately contacted his lawyer and gathered information about the final judgment on 13.05.2022. Immediately he requested for applying the certified copy of the judgment. The certified copy was delivered on 20.05.2022. Finally it was received on 20.05.2022 by the appellant."

3. We see from above quoted paragraph 3 that the execution case was

filed early in the year 2022. Applicant says, on notice of it, obviously

subsequent to the filing, he came to know, contacted his lawyer and

obtained certified copy of impugned judgment on 20th May, 2022. We

accept the explanation as sufficient cause.

4. The delay is condoned and the appeal admitted. The application is

allowed and disposed of.

5. List the appeal on 17.11.2023.

                                                                                     (Arindam Sinha)
                                                                                         Judge


Signature Not Verified                                                                (S.S. Mishra)
Digitally Signed                                                                          Judge
Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY
Designation: P.A.
Reason: Authentication

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.

Date: 03-Nov-2023 15:11:57