JAGMOHAN KASHYAP Vs. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners and respondent No.2 are husband and wife. Multifarious litigation is going on between them, one before the learned MM under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV) Act and the other before the learned Family Court under Sec. 125 Cr.P.C. The present petition has been preferred against the orders dtd. 30/1/2020 passed by the learned ASJ, Saket Court in an application preferred by the respondent No.2, u/s 5 Limitation Act against the order of the learned MM, dtd. 29/9/2014 condoning a delay of three years and ninety-nine days in filing an appeal against the said order.

(2.) It may be mentioned here that in the complaint case filed by the respondent No.2 under the DV Act, vide orders dtd. 29/9/2014, her application filed under Sec. 23 for seeking interim maintenance from the petitioner was dismissed. The learned ASJ opined that though there was a long delay in filing the appeal, the appellant had sufficiently explained the cause for the delay. Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay was allowed subject to cost of Rs.8,000.00.

(3.) It is the contention of Mr. Ashish Upadhyay, the learned counsel for the petitioner, that there was no valid explanation offered for this delay in filing the appeal and therefore, the condonation of an inordinate, unreasonably long period, without just cause, was erroneous and had caused miscarriage of justice. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the explanation offered by the respondent No.2 for the delay was lack of funds to pursue the appeal and disinclination to engage with the Legal Services Authority for legal assistance, and that the consequences of this indecision must fall on the respondent No.2 and not on the petitioner. It is further submitted that the respondent No.2 was earning well from chit fund schemes and was not bereft of funds. Thus, the reasons given to seek the condonation of delay were bogus and misleading. Accordingly, it was prayed that the impugned order be set aside.