Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 16890 (CHH)

RAJKUMAR SALAAM v. SMT. SUKYARI SALAAM

CRR/147/2024 · 2026-02-11

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:7852 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 147 of 2024 Rajkumar Salaam S/o Shri Arjun Salaam Aged About 32 Years R/o Village- Chikhalputi, Dist. Kondagaon, C.G. ... Applicant versus 1 - Smt. Sukyari Salaam W/o Rajkumar Salaam Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Bafna, Dist. Kondagaon, C.G. 2 - Kumari Elisa Salam D/o Rajkumar Salaam Aged About 11 Years R/o Village Bafna, Dist. Kondagaon, C.G. ... Non-applicants For Applicant : Mr. Amitesh Yadav, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Yogeshwar Sharma, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12 .02 .2026 1. The present revision petition has been filed by the applicant with the following prayer:- “It is, therefore, humbly prayed that the Honorable Court may kindly be pleased to allow this revision and set aside the impugned order of interim maintenance dated 25.03.2023 passed by Honble Shri Narayan Singh, Learned Judge, of Family Court at District Kondagaon RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 (C.G.) in Case no. 71/2021 in between Sukyari Salaam and Another versus Rajkumar Salaam.” 2. Learned counsel for the applicant prays that the present revision be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh revision after removing the defects. 3. However, it is evident from the record that the present revision suffers from several defects. By order dated 08.02.2024, a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court had granted one week’s time to the applicant to cure the said defects. Despite the opportunity so granted, the applicant neither appeared before the Court on the stipulated date nor removed the defects till date. It is further apparent that the present revision has been filed with a delay of 207 days, and no application seeking condonation of delay has been submitted. 4. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court finds no ground to grant the liberty as prayed for. 5. Accordingly, the present revision is dismissed on this ground alone, without granting any further liberty. 6. Let a certified copy of this order be transmitted to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan