MADARAKOLLA VEERSWAMY Vs. MADARAKOLLA RAJYA LAXMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed this petition assailing the order dtd. 15/06/2022 by which the application moved by the petitioner under sec. 151 of CPC seeking a direction to proceed the Respondent ex-parte has been disposed of.

(2.) The counsel submits that upon institution of case in Family Court the notices were issued to the Respondent and those notices were served upon the Respondent which is evident from perusal of Annexure P-4. Even the Respondent had moved an application (Annexure P-5) and stated that though she was in receipt of notice but copy of the petition was not enclosed with the said notice nor the case number was mentioned in notice. Accordingly, an application was made by petitioner to the Family Court, Bhopal which is contained in Annexure P-7 and prayed that Respondent be proceeded ex-parte. While dealing with the said application the court has again issued bailable warrant of Rs.5000.00 for securing appearance of Respondent.

(3.) Counsel submits that the court below ought to have proceeded ex-parte inasmuch as despite the receipt of notice, the Respondent did not appear. The service of notice is undisputed which is evident from communication which is contained in Annexure P-5. It was sent at the behest of Respondent only. Therefore, submits that trial court instead of issuing bailable warrant ought to have proceeded ex-parte.