LALITKUMAR BHAGWANJI DOSHI Vs. SARLABEN LALITKUMAR DOSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsels for the parties. The applicant has preferred this Civil Revision Application against the order dated 19/11/1997 passed by Learned City Civil Court, Ahmedabad in Restoration Application No. 787 of 1996 allowing the Restoration Application filed by the respondent / original defendant.

(2.) FACTS in brief deserves to be set out as under for appreciating the controversy in the matter.

(3.) THE marriage of the plaintiff and defendant had taken place on 30/5/1970 at Jamnagar. Thereafter they were residing at Bombay. Out of this wedlock the couple has one son and one daughter respectively aged about 34 years and 29 years. The plaintiff husband thereafter came to be transferred to Ahmedabad and husband and wife thus started residing at Ahmedabad. It was the case of the plaintiff husband that, on account of frequent quarrels the cohabition had become intolerable. The defendant was left of her own volition for Bombay to reside with her children in the same flat. The husband/plaintiff had to file Hindu Marriage Petition No. 385 of 1994 on 21/10/1994 in the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad seeking decree of divorce on the ground under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, namely cruelty and desertion. The trial Court issued summons which was served by registered post A.D. on 6/12/1994. The defendant did not appear and after recording deposition of the husband, ex -parte decree for divorce came to be passed on 1/9/1995 in HMP No. 385 of 1995 resulting into dissolution of marriage between the plaintiff and defendant. As record indicate the plaintiff thereafter married one Bhavna Radhekishan Shah on 15/10/1995, i.e. after a period of 45 days from the date of decree. The defendant wife filed Restoration Application on 21/10/1995 contending inter alia that she was not aware about filing of the suit and disputed her signature on the acknowledgment due card which was relied upon by the Court for proceeding ex -parte treating the summons as duly served upon the defendant wife. The defendant also raised contention with regard to jurisdiction of the trial Court. The application was opposed by the plaintiff husband and the objection/purshish came to be filed on 6/11/1995 wherein the plaintiff declared his second marriage with Bhavnaben and prayed for dismissal of the Restoration Application.