ANURAG BAJPAI Vs. INDIRA BAJPAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an Appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (in short the Act) against the judgment of the Court below dated 12.10.2007 passed in Matrimonial Case No. 79 of 2001 rejecting the plaintiff-appellant's petition preferred under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short the Act of 1955) for dissolution of marriage. Before proceeding further it is to be noted that the present appeal was admitted by this Court on 31.7.2008 issuing notice to the sole defendant-wife. On 5.8.2008 notices were sent fixing 8.9.2008 for putting in appearance. On 16.10.2008 the Registry reported that the notice has been duly served upon the defendant-opposite-party. None appeared on behalf of the defendant. On 26.2.2009 this Court directed to call for the records of the case from the Court below. The records were received on 8.9.2009. When nobody put in appearance on behalf of the sole defendant, this Court vide order dated 3.12.2010 directed issuance of fresh notice upon the defendant. On 10.12.2010 fresh notice was sent fixing 12.1.2011 as the date for appearance. Still no one appeared. The Registry again reported vide its report dated 16.4.2011 that the notices were sent but neither the acknowledgement nor the undelivered cover has been returned. Under the Rules of the Court such a notice is deemed to be sufficient. Explanation-II Rule 12 under Chapter VIII of the Rules of the Court provides that if the acknowledgement and undelivered cover is not returned the party will be deemed to have been served. This Court again taking a lenient view directed for publication of notice in newspaper vide order dated 18.4.2011. Pursuant to the said order the notice was published in the newspaper "Hindustan" on 1.5.2011. Inspite of publication and report of the office of this Court dated 16.10.2008 that the notices have been served personally on the defendant yet when non appeared vide order dated 13.7.2011, this Court directed to proceed further with the matter as the notice upon the defendant was deemed sufficient.

(2.) Under the aforesaid circumstances, inspite of fresh notice none has appeared on behalf of the defendant, we have no other option but to hear Sri Shesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and deliver the judgment.

(3.) A suit for dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Act was preferred by the appellant before the Family Court, Varanasi seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and desertion by the defendant-wife.