ROHIT KUMAR EKKA Vs. AMBIKA KISHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant, by filing this Appeal, under Order 43 Rule 1(u) of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, 'the Code') has assailed the judgment dtd. 22/1/2021 passed by the learned District Judge, Sundargarh in MAT Appeal No. 1 of 2018.

(2.) Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the Trial Court having taken the pain in sending, notice to the Respondent on several occasions did commit no mistake in passing the ex parte order when the Respondent being adamant refused to receive the notice. He further submits that the very move of the Respondent from the beginning was to protract the matter without having intention as to reunion or disposal on merit and under the given situation, the Lower Appellate Court is thus not correct in further remanding the matter. He also submits that the view taken by the Lower Appellate Court that the Respondent refusing to accept the notice had nothing to gain in the facts and circumstance is not right when in reality the purpose was to harass the Appellant which has not been taken note of. He therefore urges for admission of the Appeal formulating the above substantial questions of law.

(3.) Keeping in view the submissions made, the impugned judgment in the Appeal being perused, paragraph-8 appears to be relevant for the purpose. The Trial Court has allowed the application filed by the Appellant for his dissolution of marriage with the Respondent ex parte. The Respondent had been said ex parte therein on the basis of the report of the process server that she refused to receive the notice of the proceeding. Judgments of the courts below do not reveal that while sending the notice to the Respondent through the process of the court simultaneously notice through registered post had also been sent. The Respondent as is seen has challenged that ex parte order without any such gross delay.