One of the party got married after getting a decree of divorce from the family court. The decree was an exparte one. He married again after waiting the statutory appeal period and in full compliance of section 15 of Hindu Marriage Act.
The other party filed a petition to set aside the decree before the family court, after a delay of 290 days. The petition to condone the delay was argued in detail, after evidence, it was dismissed for want of sufficient reason.
The decision was challenged in Mat Appeal before the High Court of Kerala.
The crucial question is whether the bar under section 29(3) of Limitation Act is applicable ?
As per the provision of section 29 of Limitation Act, delay cannot be condoned in a proceedings in matrimonial cases. Therefore, the challenge against the dismissal order of delay condonation cannot be allowed in strict sense. Because, the High Court cannot direct the Family Court to condone the delay in filing the petition to set aside the decree of divorce.
Otherwise, every remarriage will be in trouble, anticipating appeals even after long delay...
The other party filed a petition to set aside the decree before the family court, after a delay of 290 days. The petition to condone the delay was argued in detail, after evidence, it was dismissed for want of sufficient reason.
The decision was challenged in Mat Appeal before the High Court of Kerala.
The crucial question is whether the bar under section 29(3) of Limitation Act is applicable ?
As per the provision of section 29 of Limitation Act, delay cannot be condoned in a proceedings in matrimonial cases. Therefore, the challenge against the dismissal order of delay condonation cannot be allowed in strict sense. Because, the High Court cannot direct the Family Court to condone the delay in filing the petition to set aside the decree of divorce.
Otherwise, every remarriage will be in trouble, anticipating appeals even after long delay...
No comments:
Post a Comment