Durairajan v. P.Nandhini

CMP(MD).No.3440 of 2025 in C.M.A.(MD).SR.No.5885 of 2025 N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

and K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

This petition has been filed to condone the delay of 293 days in filing the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

2. Heard the learned counsel on either side.

3. The main ground that has been assigned by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner for the delay is that some attempt was made by the family members to resolve the dispute amicably, but, however, it ultimately failed. Therefore, there is a delay in filing the appeal.

4. The above stand taken by the petitioner has been denied by the respondent by way of filing a counter-affidavit.

5. In our considered view, the marriage had taken only in the year 2021 and the parties had hardly lived together for two months. Therefore, ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

and K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

an attempt can be made to resolve the dispute amicably. Apart from that, we are also convinced with the reasons assigned in the affidavit and the additional affidavit filed in support of the condone delay petition.

6. In the result, this petition is allowed and delay is condoned. Registry is directed to number the petition and print the name of Mr.A.Arun Prasad, learned counsel for the respondent while listing the appeal for admission.

(N.A.V.J.,) (K.K.R.K.J.,) 26.03.2026 TSG CMP(MD).No.3440 of 2025 in C.M.A.(MD).SR.No.5885 of 2025 ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis