- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8672 RPFC No. 100101 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO.100101 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI. SATISH S/O. SHIVALINGAPPA HADAKAR, AGE: 48 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE AND MEDICAL BUSINESS, AT PRESENT NIL, R/O: HIREHARKUNI, TQ: KUNDGOL, DIST: DHARWAD – 580 005. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S. M. KALWAD, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. MANGALA W/O. SATISH HADAKAR, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: NIL. 2. KUMARI PRIYA D/O. SATISH HADAKAR, AGE: 16 YEARS, OCC: NIL, BOTH ARE R/O: HIREHARKUNI, TQ: KUNDGOL, DIST: DHARWAD – 580 005. NOW HOSAHULHALLI, TQ: RANEBENNUR DIST: HAVERI – 581 110, THE R2 IS REPRESENTED BY NATURAL MOTHER GUARDIAN I.E.R1. …RESPONDENTS THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.11.2015 MADE IN CRL. MISC. NO.84/2012 PASSED BY THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, KUNDGOL AT KUNDGOL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8672 RPFC No. 100101 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL) 1. This petition is by the husband challenging the order dated 16.11.2015 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.84/2012 on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC, Kundagol by which he has been directed to pay Rs.2,500/- each per month to his wife and only child. 2. There is a delay of 3391 days in filing the present petition. 3. The reason assigned in the affidavit accompanying the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, seeking condonation of delay is as under: “2. I state that the above said revision petition is directed against the impugned judgment dated 16.11.2015 made in Crl.Misc. No.84/2012 passed by the Court of Civil Judge and JMFC, Kundgol at Kundgol. 3. I state that the revision petition is disposed on 16.11.2015 and copy application was made to obtain the certified copy of the judgment on 18.11.2015 and same was ready and delivered on 20.11.2015 and the instant revision petition is filed on 30.06.2025. 4. I state that I am unemployed and unable to maintain myself, therefore, I couldn’t focus on the case and moreover unaware of the legal proceedings and advised by the trial court counsel to prefer - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8672 RPFC No. 100101 of 2025 revision petition before this Hon’ble court in the month of June 2025 and till then I was unaware of the legal proceedings and I couldn’t get manage to pay the maintenance, therefore I felt necessary to prefer revision petition before this Hon’ble court as I am not having any source of income. Hence, I felt necessary to prefer revision and collected the entire case papers from the trial court counsel and filed the revision petition immediately. Hence, in the process some delay has been caused in preferring the above said revision petition.” 4. Reasons assigned, apart from vague, bald and ambiguous, cannot under any circumstances be accepted as ‘sufficient cause’. 5. Furthermore, the amount of maintenance awarded more than 15 years ago is a meagre sum of Rs.2,500/- which is less than Rs.100/- per day. No grounds made out for condonation of inordinate delay of 3391 days in filing the present petition. No grounds even on merits made out warranting interference. Therefore, the petition deserved to be rejected with costs of Rs.5,000/- payable to the respondent herein. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE SMM/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 62