SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.

(ORAL) FAO (OS) No. 119/2008 & CM APPL. No. 16697/2008

1. The dispute is an unfortunate one where the appellant/husband is arrayed on one side and the respondent/wife on the other side whereas the two minor children arrayed as respondent Nos. 2 and 3. The appeal has been filed by the husband aggrieved by the impugned order dated 30.01.2008 determining the issue of interim maintenance and facilities to be extended to the respondents for their residence. The respondents have also filed cross objections albeit after a delay of 39 days.

2. We may note at the inception that averments made in the application seeking condonation of delay of 39 days filed by the respondents for taking on record the cross objections do not evoke the confidence of the Court. The reason given is that there was a fracture in the left ankle of respondent no. 1 which caused some delay and thereafter some time was taken to draft the cross objections. During this period of time, the respondents were already legally advised through counsel who was appearing before the learned Single Judge and in fact the case of the appellant is that the respondent No. 1 was even attending to legal pr