RAJIV SAXENA Vs. SUBHA SAXENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Arguments heard.

(2.) PETITIONER has filed this revision petition under Section 115 of C.P.C. against order dated 27.02.2012 passed in M.J.C. No. 8/11 by learned Additional District Judge, Datia, setting aside ex -parte decree by relying application filed under Order 9 Rule 13 read with Section 5 of Limitation Act by respondent Smt. Subha Saxena. Ex -parte decree has been passed for divorce against respondent Smt. Subha Saxena on petition filed by petitioner/husband Rajiv Saxena. Notice of which has been sent to the wife at her address at village Aagodha, district Ferozabad. Further the paper publication was also made by mentioning address of Aagodha, district Ferozabad, while the plaintiff himself has mentioned in cause title of the application that the present residence of his wife is at Kotla Road, Tilak Nagar, Ferozabad, U.P. It is an admitted fact that no notice has been sent to the wife at her present address at Ferozabad.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention towards provisions of Order 9 Rule 13 of C.P.C. and submitted that an ex -parte decree cannot be set -aside on the ground of irregularity in service of summons. If the defendant had the notice of date of hearing and sufficient time to appear and answer the plaintiffs claim.