J.D.RAJAKUMAR Vs. R.RAZIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on I.A.No-1/2015 for condonation of delay of 406 days delay in filing this petition wherein an affidavit is sworn to by the petitioner stating that the order was passed by the Family Court on 1/3/2014 and the same was not intimated to him well within time and due to communication gap, he could not contact his advocate who is at Ballari in time and he came to know about the same only in the month of June, 2015 and contacted the advocate and filed the present petition.

(2.) On perusal of the impugned order, it is seen that the petitioner was represented through an advocate and inspite of he being represented through a counsel, did not choose to lead any evidence before the Family Court and hence. This would clearly go to show that he was having the knowledge of the impugned order. The delay of 406 days has not been properly explained and the reason given by the petitioner that he was not intimated by the advocate is not a ground to condone the delay of 406 days in filing the above petition.

(3.) Even on merits also, the maintenance awarded to the wife of the petitioner is Rs.3,000.00 p.m. and the two children of the petitioner is Rs.2,000.00 p.m. each. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that one more petition was filed for enhancement of maintenance and the same has been allowed enhancing the maintenance to Rs.5,000.00 p.m. and Rs.3,000.00 p.m. respectively.