Pramod Kumar Rout vs Puspita Rout
2024 Latest Caselaw 12597 Ori

Orissa High Court

Pramod Kumar Rout vs Puspita Rout on 1 August, 2024

Bench: Arindam Sinha, M.S.Sahoo

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                      MATA No
                           Nos.153 and 170 of 2023
Pramod Kumar Rout                             .....                  Appellant

                                                        Represented by Adv.-
                                                                       Adv.
                                                       Ms. Deepali Mohapatra,
                                                                    Advocate

                                   -versus-
Puspita Rout                                  .....                Respondent

                                                        Represented by Adv.-
                                                                        Adv.
                                          Mr. Sourya Sundar Das, Sr. Advocate


                                  CORAM:
            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
                                     AND
                 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S.SAHOO


                                   ORDER

01.08.2024 Order No.

6. 1. Mr. Das, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of

respondent and submits, there is no appeal in eye of law. The appeal

was presented beyond prescribed time of 30 days from impugned

judgment dated 23rd February, 2023. He relies on sections 19(3) and

20 in Family Courts Act, 1984. He submits, sub-section section (4) in

section 28 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 can have no application in

determining prescribed period for presentation of the appeal from

impugned judgment ment made by the Family Court. He relies on view

taken by a Full ull Bench of this Court in Bibhuti Bhusan Rout vrs.

Nayak, reported in 2023 (II) CLR (FB) 1244. Sasmita Nayak

2. We find from certified copy of impugned judgment,

application for certified copy put in by appellant was on 25th

February, 2023. Requisites were notified on same day. They were

put in on 27th February, 2023 and the certified copy was made ready

immediately. It was delivered. The appeal was presented on 9th

May, 2023. Stamp Reporter had simply simply indicated that presentation

was on time.

3. Even on allowing three days for obtaining the certified copy,

the appeal ought to have been presented on 27th March, 2023. It

having been presented on 9th May, 2023, there was delay of 42

days.

4. We are bound to follow view taken by the Full Bench.

However, this point was not made when the appeal was admitted on

direction for issuance of notice of appeal. The appeal was taken up

for hearing thereafter and today respondent is to be heard.

Consideringg the point has been taken now and that view of the Full

Bench stares at us in the face, adjournment is granted for appellant

to file application for condonation of delay.

5. Mr. P.K. Satapathy, learned advocate is appointed amicus

curiaee on the question of admission of appeal.. Website copy of this

order be served on Mr. Satapathy with request to him to assist us on

adjourned date. We would like to know whether there is any other

judgment made on reference, regarding the issue.

6. List on 13th August, 2024.

(Arindam Sinha) Judge

(M.S. Sahoo) Judge

Radha/Gs