IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 103 CR-7638-2019 Date of Decision.:16.07.2025 Shoma Kanjilal …..Pe00oner Vs. Samir Kanjilal .….Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. S.K. Tripathi, Advocate for the peoner. Mr. Raghuvinder Singh, Advocate for the respondent. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Samir Kanjilal (respondent herein) filed a suit seeking decree of permanent and mandatory injuncon against his wife- defendant Shoma Kanjilal (peoner herein), which was pending before learned Principal District Judge, Family Court, Gurugram. Defendant i.e. peoner herein was contesng the suit but was proceeded ex parte on 16.10.2018 (Annexure P-1) and then ex-parte judgment & decree was passed on 22.10.2018 (Annexure P-3). Peoner then moved an applicaon before the concerned Family Court for se6ng aside the ex-parte order dated 16.10.2018 as well as the ex-parte judgment & decree dated 22.10.2018. However that applicaon was rejected by the Family Court vide impugned order dated 01.11.2019. 2. The present civil revision under Arcle 227 of the Constuon of India has been filed assailing the order dated 01.11.2019 (Annexure P-6), as well as the orders dated 16.10.2018 (wrongly menoned as 16.12.2018) and also the ex-parte judgment & decree dated 22.10.2018. NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.07.17 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-7638-2019 -2- 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondent has pointed out that revision against any order passed by the Family Court is not maintainable in view of Secon 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984. 4. Faced with the aforesaid situaon, learned counsel for the peoner prays to convert the present revision into appeal. 5. Request of learned counsel for the peoner is declined considering that an appeal preferred under sub-Secon (1) is to be heard by a Bench consisng of two or more Judges as per Secon 19(6) of the Family Court Act, 1984. 6. Learned counsel has then made a statement seeking permission to withdraw the revision with liberty to file appeal with a further prayer that me spent during the pendency of this revision be not counted towards limitaon. 7. Considering the aforesaid statement, the present revision peon is hereby disposed of being withdrawn with liberty to the peoner to file appeal in accordance with law. The peoner will also be at liberty to move necessary applicaon alongwith the appeal for seeking condonaon of delay of the period spent for pursuing this revision peon. Disposed of. (DEEPAK GUPTA) JUDGE July 16, 2025 Neeka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No NEETIKA TUTEJA 2025.07.17 16:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document