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
6 paragraphs · 362 wordsN.K. Gupta, J.—Heard on IA No. 9342/2011, an application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act.
As per the office report, there is a delay of 126 days in filing the present revision.
The applicant has mentioned the reason in the application that he was a poor person, who could not manage the fund for filing of present revision. Such ground taken in the application appears to be insufficient. The applicant had engaged an Advocate before the trial Court, and therefore he has to show that what was the amount required to him for filing of this revision and as to how he could not arrange that amount within a month. A maintenance of Rs. 1500/- was granted to the respondent, and therefore it is presumed that income of the applicant was approximately more than Rs. 3000/- per month at that time, and therefore the ground which is mentioned in the application appears to be false. Similarly, in every district even at Tahsil and Headquarter office of the Legal Services Authority is available, therefore if the applicant was not able to file a revision on his own, then he could get the legal aid in his favour from that office. Under such circumstances, no satisfactory ground is shown by the applicant by which the delay of 126 days may be condoned.
If the merit of the revision is considered, then the applicant moved an application u/s 125(5) of Cr.P.C. that the respondent was living in adultery, therefore the original maintenance order be quashed. However, it is admitted that the respondent was not divorced wife of the applicant, and therefore the maintenance order could be cancelled if second marriage of the respondent takes place. However, if the respondent is living adultery, still the applicant is responsible to pay maintenance. Consequently, there is no merit in the case. Under such circumstances, where there is no acceptable ground for condonation of delay in filing the present revision, IA No. 9342/11 is hereby dismissed.
Consequently, the present revision is also dismissed being barred by limitation.
A copy of this order be sent to the court below along with its record for information.