Shri Manir Hossain Maishan vs Smt. Fatema Khatun
2026 Latest Caselaw 2342 Tri

Tripura High Court

Shri Manir Hossain Maishan vs Smt. Fatema Khatun on 7 April, 2026

                                   Page 1 of 2


                         HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                                 AGARTALA
                I.A. No.1 of 2026 in Crl. Rev. P. No.14 of 2026
     Shri Manir Hossain Maishan,
     Aged about 46 years,
     S/O: Lt. Jalfu Mia Maishan,
     R/O: Maynama, P.O.- Kulubari,
     P.S.: Sonamura, District- Sepahijala Tripura,
     PIN-799131.
                                                          ---Petitioner(s)
                                    Versus

1.   Smt. Fatema Khatun,
     D/O: Sarbat Ali,
     W/O: Manir Hossain Maishan

2.   Mahedi Hassan,
     S/O: Manir Hossain Maishan
     Both are the resident of Vill. Kalapania,
     Rabindranagar, P.S.: Sonamura,
     District- Sepahijala, Tripura
                                                       ----Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anup Baidya, Adv.

     For Respondent(s)     : None

                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT

                                    Order
     07/04/2026

Learned Counsel, Mr. A. Baidya is present for the petitioner.

Notice upon respondent Nos.1 and 2 have been duly served

but none appeared.

The present petitioner has challenged the judgment dated

03.09.2025 passed by Learned Judge, Family Court, Sepahijala,

Sonamura in connection with case No. Crl. Misc 06 of 2023 and by

the said judgment Learned Trial Court directed the present

petitioner husband to pay maintenance of Rs.7200/- per month

from the date of filing of the case and challenging that this

petition is filed along with the petition another application under

Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 for condoning delay of 67 days in

preferring the instant revision petition.

At the time of hearing, Learned Counsel for the petitioner

submitted that it is a case under legal aid and the date of

judgment was 03.09.2025 and recently the case has been

entrusted to him and due to some unavoidable circumstances like

puja vacation the revision petition could not be filed by the

petitioner on time to the Court and the delay was unintentional.

Since, none appeared on behalf of the respondents to challenge

the application for condonation of delay, so, I find no reason to

disallow the petition filed by the present petitioner. Accordingly,

the delay of 67 days in preferring the revision petition is thus

hereby condoned and the application is allowed.

The present I.A. stands disposed of.

                                                               JUDGE




Amrita

AMRITA       Digitally signed by
             AMRITA DEB

DEB          Date: 2026.04.08
             16:09:49 +05'30'