42 CAO-820-2026.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CIVIL APPLICATION (O) NO.820 OF 2026 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL (ST) NO.27719 OF 2025 [Sau. Ruchi W/o Sanket Bagde .vs. Sanket S/o Rajesh Bagde] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court's or Judge's orders of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri. M. A. Vishnu, Advocate for Applicant/Appellant. Shri. A. A. Dhawas, Advocate for Respondent. CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE AND RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ. DATED : 28 th SEPTEMBER, 2026. 1. By this application, the appellant is seeking condonation of the delay caused in preferring the appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the Family Court, Bhandara, in Petition No.A-139 of 2024, whereby the learned Judge, while deciding the petition filed by the respondent for divorce, granted a decree of divorce. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, who submitted that initially the appellant has filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the ex parte decree, wherein time was consumed. The learned Family Court rejected the said application on 20.09.2025, and thereafter, the appeal along with the application for condonation of delay is filed. He submitted that the family members of the appellant met with an advocate for filing the appeal. The counsel took instructions and thereafter, the appeal is filed. There is sufficient and 2026:BHC-NAG:12909-DB 42 CAO-820-2026.odt 2 reasonable cause for condonation of delay, and hence, the delay be condoned. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent strongly opposed the same on the ground that the reasons mentioned in the application are not sufficient and satisfactory and therefore, the application deserves to be rejected. 4. Having heard learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the grounds raised in the application, especially in para 4, wherein the applicant has specifically mentioned that initially she filed an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the ex parte decree, which came to be rejected, and thereafter, the application along with the appeal is filed. The reason mentioned in the application appears to be reasonable and justifiable. The law is well settled as far as condonation of delay is concerned, which shows that the parties are to be permitted to pursue their cause on its own merits instead of rejecting the application on technical grounds, and a lenient view is required to be taken in such type of applications. In view of that, the application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following order: O R D E R (i) The application is allowed. (ii) The delay of 137 days is condoned and the appeal be registered accordingly. (iii) On registration of the appeal, learned counsel for the respondent waives service of notice. 42 CAO-820-2026.odt 3 (iv) Call for the record and proceedings. (v) The appeal be listed before this Court, after the record and proceedings are received, for final disposal. (RAJ D. WAKODE, J.) (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) TAMBE Signed by: Mr. Ashish Tambe Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 29/09/2026 19:15:39