Santosh Kumar Nanda vs Anisha Mishra ... Opposite Party
2024 Latest Caselaw 16484 Ori

Orissa High Court

Santosh Kumar Nanda vs Anisha Mishra ... Opposite Party on 11 November, 2024

Author: G. Satapathy

Bench: G. Satapathy

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                          RPFAM No.170 of 2024

     Santosh Kumar Nanda                   ...            Petitioner
                                  Mr. A.K. Mohanty, Advocate
                             -versus-
     Anisha Mishra                         ...        Opposite Party
                                                                     .




                                 CORAM:
                          JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
                             ORDER(ORAL)

11.11.2024 Order No.

01. I.A. No.246 of 2024

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode).

2. This is an application U/S.5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 302 days.

3. Heard, Mr. Amar Kumar Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits before this Court that when the family members of the petitioner received a notice in connection with execution case, the petitioner could come to know about the passing of the impugned judgment of maintenance and, thereafter, he obtained the copy of the impugned judgment and preferred this revision and, thereby, there is no latches or negligence on the part of the petitioner in preferring the revision petition.

4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner upon perusal of the application for

condonation of delay, this Court finds that the petitioner has filed this revision petition with a delay of 302 days. The petitioner has prayed for condonation of delay with following averments in paragraph-3 of his petition:

"3. That, when the petitioners family members received a notice from the court below in connection with the execution case, the petitioner return back to Puri and found from its local lawyer that the judgment of the learned Family Judge was delivered on 25th April, 2023. Accordingly, he collected the copy of the judgment from its counsel at Puri. The local counsel has advised to prefer an appeal before the Hon'ble High Court."

5. A scrutiny of the impugned judgment as passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Puri, it is found that the petitioner has appeared therein by engaging a counsel and also got himself examined as OPW1, but after passing of the impugned judgment, the petitioner has not challenged it immediately. There is a delay of around 302 days, which has not been properly explained by the petitioner either in his petition for condonation of delay or furnishing any documents thereto. Consequently, no ground is made out to condone the delay.

6. In the result, the petition for condonation of delay merits no consideration and is, accordingly, dismissed.

7. Since the delay in preferring the revision petition has not been condoned with dismissal of the petition for condonation of delay, the present revision petition is not admitted and is, consequently, dismissed.

(G. Satapathy) Judge

Subhasmita

Location: High Court of Orissa