HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3463 of 2008 Date: October 19, 2011 Between: B. Srinivas … Petitioner And 1. B. Bhavani & another … Respondents * * * HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3463 of 2008 O R D E R: Petitioner in this revision is defendant in O.S. No.91 of 2001 on the file of the Family Court, Secunderabad. The said suit filed by the respondents for maintenance against the petitioner resulted in an ex parte decree dated 18.3.2002. However, dissatisfied with the quantum of maintenance, the respondents preferred A.S. No.723 of 2006 before this Court. When interlocutory applications moved in the said appeal were contested, orders were passed by this Court in A.S.M.P. No.2664 of 2006 dated 28.12.2006. By virtue of the said order, the petitioner was required to pay arrears of maintenance and also directed to continue to pay future maintenance as fixed in the said order. 2. Alleging wilful non-compliance of the said order, the respondents filed Contempt Case No.548 of 2007 which was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court after hearing the learned counsel appearing for both sides herein. The Division Bench came to the conclusion that a clear case of contempt is made out and the petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. Meanwhile, the petitioner preferred I.A. No.73 of 2007 on 23rd January 2007 before the Family Court seeking condonation of delay of 1697 days in filing the application to set aside the ex parte decree. The said application was contested by the respondents and under the impugned order the Family Court dismissed the said application after finding that it is difficult to believe the explanation of the petitioner that he was not aware of the pendency of the suit before the Family Court, Secunderabad. That order is questioned in this revision. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy[1] and contended that the application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is required to be considered liberally, considering the explanation, notwithstanding the length of the delay. Though the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner appears to be attractive, on deeper examination it is noticed that the very same issue as to whether the petitioner had knowledge of the proceedings before the Family Court and passing of an ex parte decree was the subject matter of contentions before the Division Bench of this Court in Contempt Case No.548 of 2007 and in paragraphs 9 and 10 thereof this Court categorically found that the petitioner herein cannot claim ignorance of the decree passed by the court below. This Court also noticed that the transfer of the suit from one Court to another was well within the knowledge of the petitioner herein. 5. In view of the said findings recorded against the petitioner by the Division Bench of this Court in the aforesaid proceedings, it has to be held that the order of the court below rejecting the cause shown by the petitioner is justified and consequently dismissing the application for condonation of delay has to be held not open for interference in this revision petition. 6. The revision petition is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed, however no order as to costs. ____________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Date: October 19, 2011. BSB [1] (1998)7 Supreme Court Cases 123