2026:JHHC:16318-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI F.A. No. 191 of 2026 ------ Md. Iftekhar Ahmad @ Aamir, aged about 55 years, s/o Md. Nisar Ahmad @ Md. Nisar Ahmad Hashmi, Resident of Asanbani, P.O.- Godda, P.S.-Godda City, District- Godda, Jharkhand – 814133. … Petitioner/Appellant Versus Daraksan Anjum, W/o Md. Iftekhar Ahmad @ Aamir, D/o Md. Abdullah, resident of Plot No. HE-7, City Center, Near Nut Khut Sweets, Sector-IV, P.O. & P.S.- Sector-IV, B.S. City, District- Bokaro, Jharkhand- 827004. … Respondent/Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ------ For the Appellant : Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Anubhab Haldar, Advocate : Mr. Subhneet Jha, Advocate ------ 03/Dated: 8th June, 2026 1. Perused the office notice dated 08.05.2026 wherein it has been referred that the sole respondent has appeared through Vakalatnama. I.A. No. 2525 of 2026: 2. The instant interlocutory application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 7 days in filing the instant appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted by referring to the 2026:JHHC:16318-DB cause shown in the instant interlocutory application, particularly at Paragraphs- 5, 6 & 7 that the delay of 7 days in filing the present appeal may be condoned. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has orally objected the said submission, however, has not filed any written objection to the instant interlocutory application. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the delay condonation application. 6. This Court, after considering the reasons assigned at Paragraphs 5, 6 & 7, is of the view that if the delay in filing the present appeal will not be condoned, then the appellant will suffer irreparable loss and injury and the matter will remain undecided on merit. 7. Accordingly, the instant interlocutory application being I.A. No. 2525 of 2026 filed for condonation of delay of 7 days in filing the present appeal is allowed, and as such, disposed of. F.A. No. 191 of 2026: 8. Mr. Mukesh Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant, in course of his argument, has submitted that during the pendency of the present lis, the child has attained majority. 9. The learned counsel, therefore, on instruction, has submitted that he is not intended to press the instant appeal. 10. Such submission has been made in the presence of learned counsel 2026:JHHC:16318-DB for the respondent. 11. Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant, the instant appeal is rendered to be infructuous, and as such disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) 8th June, 2026 Samarth Uploaded on 9th June, 2026