FA No.518 of 2011
Smt. Janki Verma Brajbhushan Verma
19.09.2011.
Shri G.S.Thakur, counsel for the appellant.
This appeal is filed under Section 28 of Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955 by which the judgment and decree dated 17.4.2009
passed by the 6th Additional District Judge (FTC), Chhatarpur in
Hindu Marriage Case No.18-A/2008 has been assailed.
From the perusal of the aforesaid,it is apparent that the
appellant has challenged the compromise decree under Section
13B of Hindu Marriage Act which was passed by the trial Court
on the basis of a joint petition filed by the parties.
This appeal is filed solely on the ground that at the time of
passing of judgment, no permanent alimony has been provided
to the appellant or the appellant is entitled for payment of
Rs.5.00 lacs from the respondent. This appeal is barred by 712 days. In the application, it is
stated that the appellant was ill and she could not contact the
counsel and when she recovered from illness, she contaced to
the counsel and this appeal has been filed after such delay. No
particulars in respect of ailment or the period of ailment has been
given in the application. Apart from this, no medical certificate or
medical papers have been filed to show that in fact the appellant
was sick for a period of 712 days. In absence of particulars,
when a compromise decree has been passed between the
parties, we are not satisfied that the appellant has made out a
case for condonation of delay.
In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any justification
even for issuance of notice to the other side for condonation of
delay.
FA No.518 of 2011
Smt. Janki Verma Brajbhushan Verma
In view of the aforesaid, I.A.No.9372/2011 is dismissed
without notice to the other side and accordingly this appeal is
also dismissed.
So far as contention of the appellant that she is entitled
for permanent alimony is concerned, the appellant is free to
agitate the matter before the appropriate forum in accordance
with law, if advised so.
With the aforesaid liberty, this appeal is dismissed with no
other as to costs.
(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt. Vimla Jain)
Judge Judge
JLL