LAXMI Vs. KANHAIYA LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act 1963 read with sec. 28(4) of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking condonation of delay of 2363 (though mentioned as 2303 in the heading) days in filing the appeal. We have heard the Learned Counsels. The reasons given in the application are:

(2.) The very fact that the appellant has filed the present case through Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee for legal aid clearly indicates the financial condition of the appellant. We have no reason to disbelieve that the appellant had no financial sources to engage a lawyer and/or file the appeal in time. We do not doubt the genuineness of the reasons given by the appellant. Liberal view is required to be taken while considering an application under Sec. 5 under the Limitation Act when there is "sufficient cause" shown for non-filing within the period of limitation. Otherwise, grave and serious prejudice would be caused to the appellant in case the delay is not condoned. We may refer to Ummer v. Pottengal Subida and Others, (2018) 15 SCC 127.

(3.) The impugned order is dtd. 20/5/2013 and, on 26/6/2013, a judgment has been delivered by Mahila Courts-2, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi, wherein the Mahila Court has given a prima facie finding of cruelty meted out by the respondent to the appellant. That being so, the appellant could, in any event, have filed a fresh petition on grounds of cruelty basing it on the order of 26/6/2013 of the Mahila Courts. There being no bar, and the appellant being very much within her rights to file a fresh petition on the grounds of cruelty, we see no reason to relegate the appellant to filing a fresh petition as that would only entail multiplicity of proceedings and delays.