Santosh Shankar Waghmare v. Swati Santosh Waghmare And ANR

by RUPALI RAJESH WAKODIKAR Date:

2022.01.25 15:23:54 +0530

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

RUPALI RAJESH WAKODIKAR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1109 OF 2020 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (ST) NO. 168 OF 2020 Santosh Shankar Waghmare ...Applicant

Versus

Swati Santosh Waghmare and Anr.

...Respondents

Mr. Shyam P. Khot for the Applicant.

Mr. Rishiraj Gohil for the Respondent No.1.

Mr. A.R.Patil, A.P.P for the Respondent-State. CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

DATE : 21 ST JANUARY, 2022 (Through Video Conferencing) P.C. :

1.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

By this interim application, the applicant seeks condonation of delay of 481 days caused in filing the aforesaid Revision Application. 3.

Learned Counsel for the applicant states that the impugned order was passed on 2nd December, 2017, however, he was not informed of 1/4

the same by his Advocate. He submits that on the very next date i.e. on 3rd December, 2017 the applicant's sister expired, as a result of which, he was not in a frame of mind and as such, the matter left unattended. He submits that the applicant is jobless and as such, his financial condition is not good. He submits that in the interest of justice, the delay be condoned and the Revision Application be heard on merits.

4.

Learned Counsel for the respondent No.1 opposes the application. He submits that the delay is not of 481 days as pleaded by the applicant, but 841 days. He submits that the applicant is in arrears of the maintenance awarded by the Trial Court.

5.

There is substantial delay caused in filing the aforesaid Revision Application. However, as the applicant has agreed to pay substantial cost for condoning the delay and as the learned Counsel for the respondent No.1 has no objection to condoning the delay, subject to payment of sufficient costs by the applicant to the respondent No.1, the Court is inclined to consider the said application seeking condonation of delay caused in filing the Revision Application. 6.

During the course of hearing, learned Counsel for the applicant 2/4

was directed to take instructions whether the applicant was ready to deposit costs of Rs.25,000/-, in the account of the respondent No.1, for condoning delay. Learned Counsel for the applicant, on instructions, states that the applicant is ready to pay Rs.25,000/- as costs, directly in the account of the respondent No.1, within four weeks from today. Statement accepted. 7.

Considering the aforesaid, the application is allowed and delay that has occurred in filing the aforesaid Revision Application is condoned, subject to the applicant depositing cost of Rs.25,000/- directly in the account of the respondent No.1 within four weeks from today. Learned Counsel for the respondent No.1 assures to furnish the details of the respondent No.1's account to the learned Counsel for the applicant to enable him to comply with the said order.

8.

This application is allowed and the delay is condoned, subject to payment of costs as stated aforesaid.

9.

Interim application is accordingly disposed of on the above terms.

10.

Learned Counsel for the applicant to produce a receipt of the 3/4

payment of costs in the Registry, so as to enable the Registry to place the Revision Application on 21st February, 2022, if the order of costs is complied with.

11.

Documents, if any, to be filed by the respective parties in the Registry with an advance copy to the otherside. 12.

All parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

4/4