LAWS(ALL)-2022-7-70

RENU YADAV Vs. AMIT KUMAR YADAV

Decided On July 11, 2022
RENU YADAV Appellant
V/S
Amit Kumar Yadav Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(2.) This appeal is directed against the order dtd. 9/3/2022 passed by the Family Court, Gautam Buddh Nagar for rejection of the applications 17-Ga-2 and 19-Ga-2, the application under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act accompanied with the application under Order 9 Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure for recall of the order dtd. 3/4/2019 to proceed with the suit exparte, on account of non appearance of the appellant/defendant on the date fixed before the Family Court. In the order dtd. 3/4/2019 to proceed exparte, it was noted by the Family Court that the appellant/defendant therein was not present and no written settlement was filed by her.

(3.) A perusal of the order sheet of the Family Court brought on record by means of the supplementary affidavit filed today indicates that on the presentation of the suit on 10/9/2018, the plaintiff/defendant was directed to take steps for service of summons upon the defendant. On the next date fixed, further time was granted to do pairvi within seven days and 14/1/2019 was fixed for written statement. The appellant herein/defendant/wife had put in appearance before the Family Court on 14/1/2019 itself and time was granted to file written statement while fixing 3/4/2019 by the Family Court. On 3/4/2019, the defendant wife could not appear and written statement was not filed by her. The decision was, therefore, taken to proceed exparte and 10/7/2019 was fixed by the Family Court. On 10/7/2019, nothing happened as the Presiding Officer was on training and the matter was posted on 13/8/2019 for exparte evidence. On the said date itself, the applications 17-Ga-2 and 18-Ga-2 were filed by the defendant wife to seek recall of the order dtd. 3/4/2019 to proceed in the suit exparte. The said applications were contested by the plaintiff/respondent herein for a period of more than three years and they have been rejected vide order dtd. 9/3/2022, which is subject matter of challenge in the present appeal.