LAWS(KER)-2010-6-26

DAWOOD Vs. ZUBAIDA B A

Decided On June 10, 2010
DAWOOD Appellant
V/S
ZUBAIDA B.A. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Can a recalcitrant litigant be permitted to take advantage of the alleged inadequacy in the service of notice when it is clear as day light that he had full knowledge of the proceedings and opportunity to participate in the same

(2.) This appeal is preferred by the Appellant through his power of attorney holder, his father, against dismissal of applications to condone the delay of 330 days and to set aside an ex parte order of divorce passed against him under Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939.

(3.) To the skeletal facts first. The marriage took place on 18-7-2004. The wife claimed divorce under Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act in a petition filed in 2007-as O.P. No. 225 of 2007. The Appellant/husband was employed abroad. Notice could not be personally served on him. Attempt was made to effect service by affixture at the place of permanent residence of the Appellant in India. The notice was affixed. To that affixture, the father of the Appellant, his present power of attorney holder, was a witness. The Appellant did not appear even thereafter. It was, in these circumstances, that on 15-1-2008, an ex parte decree was passed against the Appellant dissolving the marriage. Long later, after the lapse of about a year, the Appellant filed an application to set aside the ex parte order. That application was preferred by him through his father/power of attorney holder. Along with that application, he filed Anr. application to condone the delay of 330 days in filing such application.