Delhi High Court’s Decision to Grant Appellant Another Opportunity in Family Court Appeal
In a recent decision dated April 5, 2024, the Delhi High Court addressed MAT.APP.(F.C.)No.109/2024, involving an appeal filed by Anuradha Kashyap against Dr. Sushil Kumar. The case, heard by Hon’ble Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Hon’ble Justice Amit Bansal, focused on the closure of the appellant’s right to cross-examine the respondent [PW-1] by the Family Court. The delay in filing the appeal and subsequent interim relief sought by both parties were also considered.
Delay Condoned in Filing the Appeal
An application was filed by the appellant seeking condonation of a 24-day delay in filing the appeal. The respondent’s counsel did not object to this request, leading to the court’s decision to allow the application.
Interim Relief and Cross-Examination
The appeal contested an order passed by the Family Court on February 9, 2024, which closed the appellant’s right to cross-examine the respondent. The reason cited for this closure was the repeated adjournment requests made by the appellant’s counsel. Despite acknowledging the need for better arrangement by the appellant’s counsel, the court granted another opportunity for cross-examination, directing the Family Court to proceed with the matter even if the appellant’s counsel is unavailable. However, costs amounting to Rs. 7,500 were imposed on the appellant due to the delays caused by counsel unavailability.
Conclusion
The High Court’s decision to grant the appellant another chance in the family court appeal underscores the importance of timely legal proceedings. While accommodating the appellant’s circumstances, the court emphasized the need for adherence to legal timelines and imposed costs to deter further delays.
Relevant Laws Mentioned:
- Procedural laws governing court hearings and adjournments
This summary outlines the key points of the judgment, highlighting the court’s decision, relevant legal acts, and implications for the parties involved.
