1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY : AURANGABAD BENCH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 517 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 52 OF 2009 Abdul Shakur s/o. Abdul Khalique, age 29 years occ. labour, R/o. Bhagli, tq. Chalisgaon, District Jalgaon. - - - Petitioner versus Mrs. Nuzhat Fatema w/o. Abdul Shakur, age 25 years, occ. household, R/o. Kiradpura, Near Ram Mandir, Near National Stall Centre, Aurangabad, C/o. Sayed Tarkhe Quadri. - - Respondent Shri K. C. Sant, Advocate for applicant. Mrs. C. E. Gaikwad, Advocate for respondent. CORAM : N. D. DESHPANDE, J. Dated : 7th August 2009 PER COURT: 1. Heard Shri Sant for the petitioner. Petitioner has filed a separate application for 2 condonation of delay of 123 days in filing the criminal revision application against respondent wife. Respondent is represented by Mrs. C.E. Gaikwad. She opposed the application for condonation of delay stating that no satisfactory reasons are given and even on merits also the application is not maintainable. 2. I have gone through the relevant paragraphs of the application for condonation of delay. When parties are litigating and want to challenge the order passed by the Court in appeal or revision, the delay becomes inevitable for some reason or the other. Therefore, merely because application is opposed by the opposite party, it cannot be rejected or discarded and has to be considered for the reasons stated. It is true that opposite party respondent had right to oppose revision application on merits because her right to claim maintenance is legitimate. 3. Upon consideration of the record and after 3 hearing both the sides, delay of 123 days is condoned. Application is allowed and accordingly disposed of. ( N.D.DESHPANDE, J.) pnk/cria51709