Sau. Shradha W/O. Sumit Fogla, Thr. P.O.A. Father Hanumanprasad Sigtia v. Dr. Sumit Narayanprasad Fogla

1 36.cao.1481.2016

IN THE HIGH

COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1481 OF 2016 IN MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8919 OF 2016 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL ST. NO.421 OF 2016 Sau. Shradha w/o Sumit Fogla ..vs..

Dr. Sumit Narayanprasad Fogla - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri J.B. Gandhi, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Soumitra Paliwal, Advocate for the respondent. CORAM: PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.

DATED : 17/09/2025.

Heard.

2.

This Court vide order dated 10.09.2025 requested the Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents in other matters, to appear in the present matter also. Accordingly, Advocate Soumitra Paliwal appeared in the matter. He has pointed out that non-applicant is facing serious health ailments and therefore he can file at the most the memo of appearance on his behalf in the matter.

3.

Office is directed to accept the same.

4.

By this application, the applicant is seeking condonation of 43 days delay in filing the restoration application. The record shows that due to non removal of office objection within stipulated period, the Registrar (Judicial) has passed the order of dismissal of appeal. 5.

Learned Counsel for the appellant states that the office objection can be removed within a period of seven days if the delay is condoned.

6.

In view of the statement and reasons stated in the

2 36.cao.1481.2016 application, the delay stands condoned. The application is allowed.

MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION ST. NO. 8919 OF 2016 7.

Heard.

8.

By this application, the appellant is seeking restoration of Family Court Appeal st. no. 421/2016, which the registration was rejected by order dated 01.03.2016. 9.

Considering the reasons stated in the application, which are not controverted in the matter, the application is allowed. Registry is directed to restore the first appeal to its original file.

10.

Appellant to remove office objection within a week.

11.

List the matter for further consideration after two weeks.

(PRAVIN S. PATIL , J.

) Trupti