2026:HHC:33048 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA FAO (FC) No.03 of 2026 Date of decision: 06.08.2026 Isha Kumari. ...Appellant. Versus Manoj Kumar. …Respondent. Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner(s) : Ms. Ragini Dogra, Advocate (Legal Aid Counsel). For the respondent : Mr. Devender Kumar Sharma, Advocate. Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge This appeal has been preferred against order dated 26.05.2025 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, District Mandi, in CMA No.5 of 2024 (Reg. No.26/2024) titled as ‘Isha Kumari vs. Manoj Kumar’ passed in application filed under Section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963, for condonation of delay in filing application under Order IX Rule 13 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 2. Record was requisitioned. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes -2- 2026:HHC:33048 4. From the record, it is apparent that an ex parte decree for dissolution of marriage was passed against present appellant in a petition filed by the respondent-Manoj Kumar, on 08.12.2023. 5. The appellant was having two options, either to assail the ex parte decree by filing an appeal or by filing an application under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC, for setting aside the ex parte decree within 30 days from the date of passing of the decree. 6. Record of the Court below reveals that an application for supplying certified copy of judgment and decree dated 08.12.2023, was filed on 12.12.2023 and the copy was completed, examined and attested on 14.12.2023, which was received by the appellant on 03.01.2024. 7. The application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC was preferred by the counsel along with an application under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, on 10.01.2024, and the Family Court has dismissed this application under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, on the ground that no sufficient cause has been reflected in filing the application under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC, after expiry of limitation period. 8. As the impugned judgment and decree was passed on 08.12.2023, copy was applied on 12.12.2023, the copy was attested on -3- 2026:HHC:33048 14.12.2023, the application under Order IX Rule 13 was filed on 10.01.2024. 9. From the aforesaid dates, it is apparent that after excluding three days' time, i.e. from 12.12.2023 to 14.12.2023, the limitation period of 30 days for filing application under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC was to expire on 10.01.2024, and the application was filed on 10.01.2024, within the limitation period, and therefore, there was no requirement for filing an application under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act. 10. At the time of deciding the application under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, the Family Court has swayed by the incorrect pleadings settled by the counsel for the applicant, stating therein that there was 93 days’ delay in filing the application. In fact, there was no delay in filing the application under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC. 11. In the aforesaid circumstances, the impugned order dated 26.05.2025 is set aside and the matter is remanded to Principal Judge, Family Court, Mandi, District Mandi, for deciding afresh, after listing the application under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC, being filed within limitation period, i.e. on 10.01.2024, as apparent from the record, and by disposing of the application under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, being unnecessary, as the application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC was within limitation period. -4- 2026:HHC:33048 12. We have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the application filed under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC. 13. The Family Court shall decide the application under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC, in accordance with law on its own merits without being influenced by any observation made by this Court in this order. 14. Parties are directed to appear before the Family Court on 01.09.2026. 15. Registry is directed to remit back the record of the Family Court forthwith. 16. Appeal is disposed of in aforesaid terms along with pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Vivek Singh Thakur) Judge (Ranjan Sharma) Judge 6th August, 2026 (Pardeep)