SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA Vs. SANGEETA SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter was passed over on the first call as none was present on behalf of the respondent, nor has any reply been filed by her to this application. Even on the second call, none is present on behalf of the respondent.

(2.) The appellant/petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 13.01.2015 passed by the Learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Tis Hazari Court, where under, an application filed by his wife/respondent for seeking maintenance for herself and her minor child was allowed and he was directed to pay pendente lite maintenance from the date of filing the application, i.e. from 04.07.2013. Contemporaneously, the main divorce petition filed by the appellant/petitioner was dismissed for non-prosecution.

(3.) Accompanying the present appeal is an application (CM No. 11673/2017), for seeking condonation of delay of 763 days in filing the accompany appeal. As per the averments made in the said application, the previous counsel of the appellant did not apprise him about the pendency of the application filed under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and about the passing of the impugned order which came to his knowledge only after he received summons in an execution petition filed by the respondent, bearing Ex.P. No. 3818/2016.