TAMIZ YAKUBBHAI SHEIKH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
LAWS(GJH)-2016-8-36
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on August 10,2016

Tamiz Yakubbhai Sheikh Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Heard learned advocate Ms. Dimple Thaker, appearing for the applicant, whereas, Mr. Manan Mehta, learned APP for the State, which is a formal party and learned advocate Mr. Rathin P. Raval, appearing for opponents Nos.2 and 3.
(2.) The applicant herein is husband, whereas opponent no.2 is his wife and opponent no.3 is their daughter. The opponent - wife and minor daughter have preferred Criminal Misc. Application No. 775 of 2013 before the learned Family Court at Rajkot seeking maintenance from the present applicant under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. By judgment and order dated 30.06.2015, the learned Family Court has directed the applicant to pay an amount of Rs.40,000/ - per month towards maintenance of wife and Rs.30,000/ - per month towards maintenance of minor daughter from the date of divorce i.e. 10.03.2012. While awarding maintenance as above, the Family Court has also directed the applicant to purchase 3 BHK flat (Three Bedroom, Hall, Kitchen) in the name of opponent No.2 within the radius of 1 Km. from the flat where the applicant is residing and to execute a registered sale deed in the name of wife and also to pay Rs.25,000/ - towards litigation expenses and Rs.1,00,000/ - towards exemplary cost. The applicant has challenged the said order by filing Criminal Revision Application No.768 of 2015 on 16.12.2015 and thereby considering the date of the order being 30.06.2015, there is delay of 66 days in filing such revision application. 2.1. Therefore, the applicant has also filed captioned Criminal Misc. Application for condonation of delay so as to condone the delay of 66 days in filing the main revision application challenging the order of maintenance as aforesaid.
(3.) Considering the rival submissions and so also the facts and circumstances emerging from the record, it seems that the matter is to be remanded to the learned Family Court for deciding it afresh on its own merits after giving reasonable opportunity to both the sides to prove their respective case. Both the parties have agreed to hear and decide the revision application also along with the application for condonation of delay. There is a reason to do so because, the learned Family Court has probably exceeded its jurisdiction under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure while allowing application for maintenance by granting the relief for separate residence and with a direction to the present applicant to purchase 3 BHK flat (Three Bedroom, Hall and Kitchen) in the name of opponent no. 2 - wife and within the radius of 1 km., from the flat where the applicant is residing and to execute a registered sale deed in the name of wife. 3.1. Therefore, both the parties have argued at length on merits of the main application also In view of the above facts, practically Criminal Misc. Application No. 24910 of 2015 seeking condonation of delay of 66 days in filing Criminal Revision Application No. 768 of 2915 is allowed, because sufficient cause is shown to condone the delay in filing such revision application in prescribed period of limitation.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.