##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

MATA No.151 of 2025

Rakesh Samal (cid:0)«(cid:0)(cid:17) Appellant

Represented By Adv.-

Mr. Thakur Sangram Singh, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Gouri Kumar Rath, Advocate

-versus-

Harapriya Samal (cid:0)«(cid:0)(cid:17) Respondent Represented By Adv.-

Mr. Partha Sarathi Nayak, Advocate

CORAM:

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK AND

(cid:0)7(cid:0)+(cid:0)((cid:0)(cid:3)(cid:0)+(cid:0)2(cid:0)1(cid:0)¶(cid:0)%(cid:0)/(cid:0)((cid:0)(cid:3)(cid:0)0(cid:0)5(cid:0)(cid:17)(cid:0)(cid:3)(cid:0)-(cid:0)8(cid:0)6S(cid:0)7IB(cid:0),O(cid:0)& S(cid:0)((cid:0)A(cid:3)NKAR MISHRA

ORDER

08.04.2026 (Hybrid mode)

Order No.

I.A. No.216 of 2025 & MATA No.151 of 2025

03. 1. Heard Mr. Thakur Sangram Singh, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. Gouri Kumar Rath, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-husband and Mr. Partha Sarathi Nayak,

learned counsel appearing for the respondent-wife.

2. The appellant-husband as petitioner filed Civil Proceeding No.57/2024 before the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Dhenkanal under Section 13 of the Hindu

Page 1 of 4

Marriage Act, 1955 against the respondent-wife seeking dissolution their marriage solemnized on 17.01.2020.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner (appellant herein), the learned Judge, Family Court, Dhenkanal by the impugned judgment dated 09.12.2024 dismissed the said Civil Proceeding No.57/2024 of the appellant/petitioner-husband on ex parte against the

respondent-wife.

4. Aggrieved by the said ex parte judgment dated 09.12.2024, the appellant-husband preferred this appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 read with

Hindu Marriage and Divorce (Orissa High Court) Rules, 1956 and Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, with a reported

delay of 75 days.

5. The I.A. has been filed for condonation of reported delay of 75 days in filing the said appeal.

6. Earlier notice was issued to the respondent-wife in the present I.A.

7. Mr. Partha Sarathi Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-wife, on the other hand, opposed the petition

for condonation of delay.

8. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand) by the appellant-husband to the respondent-wife either by way of demand draft or by

Page 2 of 4

depositing the said amount in her bank account, the delay of

75 days in preferring the connected appeal be condoned.

9. I.A. stands disposed of.

(Manash Ranjan Pathak), Judge

(Sibo Sankar Mishra), Judge

MATA No.151 of 2025

04. 1. Heard Mr. Thakur Sangram Singh, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. Gouri Kumar Rath, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-husband and Mr. Partha Sarathi Nayak,

learned counsel appearing for the respondent-wife.

2. Admit this appeal.

3. Appellant shall serve a copy of this appeal memo along with all the annexures on Mr. Partha Sarathi Nayak, learned

counsel for the respondent-wife, if not already served.

4. Call for the scanned copy of the Records of Civil Proceeding No.57/2024 from the Court of learned Judge, Family Court, Dhenkanal, which was disposed of on

09.12.2024.

5. List this matter on 24 ^th June, 2026.

Page 3 of 4

6. On the next date fixed, the appellant-husband shall place the proof of depositing of the payment of cost of

Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand) to the respondent-wife.

(Manash Ranjan Pathak), Judge

(Sibo Sankar Mishra), Judge

Rabindra

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RABINDRA KUMAR MISHRA

Designation: Personal Assistant

Reason: Authentication

Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK

Date: 08-Apr-2026 20:22:10

Page 4 of 4