AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
10 paragraphs · 209 wordsVivek Bharti Sharma, J
Delay Condonation Application (IA/1/23)
In view of the grounds stated and considering the fact that the learned counsels for the respondents fairly do not oppose the application, delay of 254 days is condoned. Delay condonation application, made therefor, stands allowed.
CRLR No.85 of 2023
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Learned counsel for the revisionist would submit that, the impugned order was passed ex-parte and the interim maintenance of ₹ 3,000/- fixed, is on higher side. However, the learned counsel for the revisionist could not tell what impropriety, irregularity and illegality is in the impugned order that would need the intervention of this Court in revision.
On the other hand, the revisionist had an opportunity to approach the learned Lower Court itself for setting aside the ex-parte order for which the revisionist could not give any plausible reason, except that the learned Lower Court would ask the revisionist to submit arrears of the interim maintenance passed against him.
In considered view of this Court, the revisionist has an efficacious remedy of filing of an application for setting aside the ex-parte order before the Trial Court.
Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed accordingly.