SUNITA SENAPATI Vs. BISMAYA MOHAPATRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Jena, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant, wife in the marriage annulled by ex-parte judgment dtd. 7/4/2023 made by the Family Court. He had earlier submitted, the appeal is directed against order dtd. 16/1/2024 of the Family Court, refusing to admit the application for setting aside the ex parte judgment. Though, his client was precluded from filing written statement, it cannot stand in the way of relief under rule 13 in order IX, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. On subsequent occasion he had submitted that not only was his client precluded from filing written statement but also, when learned advocate engaged by her had failed to appear, the Family Court ought to have issued notice to his client. He had relied on judgment dtd. 2/12/1997 of the Supreme Court in Malkiat Singh v. Joginder Singh, reported in AIR 1998 SC 258.

(2.) At this juncture, we reproduce below paragraphs 2 and 3 from our order dtd. 18/4/2024.

(3.) The appeal was subsequently heard on 9/5/2024. Paragraph-2 from our order made that day is reproduced below.