{FA(MAT)No.60/2026} 2026:CGHC:10996-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR FA(MAT) No. 60 of 2026 {Arising out of judgment and decree dated 9-3-2007 in Civil Suit No.389A/2006 of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur} 1. Smt Nirmala Tarasia, aged about 51 years, Widow of Late Harihara Tarasia, Occupation House wife, 2. Sneha Tarasia, aged about 32 years, un-married daughter of Late Harihar Tarasia, 3. Anita Tarasia, aged about 28 years, un-married daughter of Late Harihar Tarasia, Appellant No.1 is widow and appellant No.2 & 3 are unmarried daughter of Late Harihar Tarasia, R/o Dharina, P.O. Kosida, P.S. Kishan Nagar, District Cuttack, Pin Code No. 754130 (Defendants) ... Appellants versus Chhabi Tarasia, W/o Harihara Tarasia, Occupation Serving in Railway, Raipur Division, R/o House No.574, Housing Board Colony, Saddu, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Pin Code No. 492001 (Plaintiff) ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Ajaya Kumar Barik, Advocate. For Respondent : Not noticed. Division Bench: - Hon'ble Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal and Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, JJ. Judgment On Board (02/03/2026) Sanjay K. Agrawal, J. SISTA SOMAYAJULU Digitally signed by SISTA SOMAYAJULU Date: 2026.03.03 17:17:49 +0530 {FA(MAT)No.60/2026} 1. The appellants have preferred this appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, calling in question legality, validity and correctness of the impugned judgment & decree dated 9-3-2007 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur in Civil Suit No.389A/2006, by which decree for dissolution of marriage was granted in favour of appellant No.1’s husband Harihar Tarasia, who died on 17-5-2021 i.e. after passing of the impugned judgment & decree. 2. The appeal is barred by 6801 days. 3. Application for condonation of delay has been filed stating inter alia that appellant No.1 came to know about filing of divorce petition by the deceased husband in the year 2021 and yet the instant appeal has been filed on 23-1-2026 along with application for condonation of delay, for setting aside the impugned decree for dissolution of marriage. It has been further stated in the application for condonation of delay that due to non-service of notice in the civil suit/application for dissolution of marriage, appellant No.1 could not prefer appeal right in time. However, it is the case of appellant No.1 that she came to know about filing of divorce petition in the year 2021, yet there is no explanation for the inordinate delay in filing the instant appeal on 23-1-2026. 4. According to the own showing of appellant No.1, she came to know about the impugned divorce proceeding in the year 2021 and filed the instant appeal on 23-1-2026. Even otherwise, husband had already {FA(MAT)No.60/2026} died after granting the decree on 17-5-2021 and the present appeal has been filed against one Chhabi Tarasia, who claims to be the wife of late Harihar Tarasia, with an inordinate delay of 6801 days. As such, no sufficient cause has been shown for the inordinate delay in filing the instant appeal and therefore the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal is rejected, as no sufficient cause has been shown and consequently the appeal stands dismissed in limine. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE JUDGE Soma