Sikkim High Court
Yangchen Donkar Bhutia vs Sonam Pintso Bhutia on 23 September, 2025
Bench: Chief Justice, Meenakshi Madan Rai
IA No. 01/2025 in Mat. App. No.96/2025 (Filing No.)
Ms. Yangchen Donkar Bhutia vs. Mr. Sonam Pintso Bhutia
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
IA NO. 01/2025
IN
MAT. APP. NO. 96/2025 (Filing No.)
Ms. Yangchen Donkar Bhutia,
Wife of Sonam Pintso Bhutia,
Resident of below Sonam Hotel, Lal Market,
P.O. and P.S. Gangtok, Sikkim.
Presently residing at Rongyek, Bhusuk Road,
Near Panchayat House, Gangtok,
Sikkim. Applicant/Appellant
Versus
Mr. Sonam Pintso Bhutia,
Son of Late Lhakpa Thenup Bhutia,
Resident of below Sonam Hotel, Lal Market,
P.O. and P.S. Gangtok, Sikkim.
Pin Code - 737101 Respondents
For Applicant/Appellant : Mr. Pramit Chhetri, Advocate.
For Respondent : Ms. Zola Megi, Advocate.
Date: 23/09/2025
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWANATH SOMADDER, CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE
...
J U D G E M E N T:
(per the Hon'ble, the Chief Justice)
This is an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, for
the purpose of seeking condonation of delay for filing of an appeal under
section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984. The judgment and order of
the learned Family Court was passed in respect of Family Court (Crl.) Case
No.36 of 2024, in an application under section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
IA No. 01/2025 in Mat. App. No.96/2025 (Filing No.)
Ms. Yangchen Donkar Bhutia vs. Mr. Sonam Pintso Bhutia
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (Mrs. Yangchen Donkar Bhutia vs. Mr. Sonam
Pintso Bhutia), on 05th March, 2025. The period of delay in filing of the
present appeal, as stated in the instant application, is 135 (one hundred
and thirty five) days.
2. The question that was posed by this Court is whether the period of
135 (one hundred and thirty five) days can be condoned by this Court
under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, while taking into account the
fact that this matter is in respect of an order passed by the Family Court,
exercising its powers under section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 {which corresponds to section 125 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (falling under Chapter IX) being the old law}.
3. For the purpose of this matter, we need to consider and read section
19(2) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, carefully:-
"19. Appeal.-- ....................................
(2) No appeal shall lie from a decree or order passed by the
Family Court with the consent of the parties or from an order passed under
Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974):
Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any appeal
pending before a High Court or any order passed under
Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (2 of 1974) before the
commencement of the Family Courts (Amendment) Act, 1991."
4. A plain reading of the above provision of law clearly reveals that in
the facts of the instant case, there is no scope for any appeal from an order
passed by the Family Court under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (which dealt with maintenance under section 125 of the
old law) and which is now squarely covered under section 144, falling under
Chapter X of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
5. Since there is no scope for maintaining any appeal against an order
passed by the Family Court under section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, there is no question of this Court exercising its
discretion to condone the delay in preferring an appeal from an order
therefrom.
IA No. 01/2025 in Mat. App. No.96/2025 (Filing No.)
Ms. Yangchen Donkar Bhutia vs. Mr. Sonam Pintso Bhutia
6. The application is, therefore, liable to be dismissed and is accordingly
dismissed.
(Meenakshi Madan Rai) (Biswanath Somadder)
Judge Chief Justice
jk/ds
