JASMINUM KAUR Vs. AMARDEEP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall dispose of FAO No.5940 of 2012. Jasminum Kaur has filed this appeal against order dated 6.10.2012, passed by the learned District Judge, Jalandhar, vide which, her application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, for setting aside the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 16.11.2009, passed by the then District Judge, Jalandhar under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in HMA Case No.25 of 2009 was dismissed.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that Amardeep Singh, husband of the appellant filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the learned District Judge, Jalandhar on 31.1.2009. In the petition, it was stated that he solemnised the marriage with the respondent (present appellant) on 28.9.2003 according to sikh rites and ceremonies at Ludhiana. The parties cohabited as husband and wife at Jalandhar. From the wedlock, a daughter, namely, Reet Kaur was born on 24.6.2004, who is now living with her mother. Thereafter, certain allegations of cruelty were levelled and it was prayed that divorce may be granted on the ground of desertion and cruelty. Notice was issued to the respondent (present appellant) through ordinary process as well as registered letter. The summons were not received back but the registered letter was received back with the report of refusal. Hence, she was proceeded ex-parte. After recording ex-parte evidence, divorce decree was granted on 16.11.2009.

(3.) Appellant in her application claimed that she was not served with the notice of the divorce petition. The divorce petition was filed by concealing facts, on the basis of false allegation against her. The appellant is ready to live with her husband. Decree is result of outcome of fraud and misrepresentation. She stated that one Maninder Singh Chatwal resident of Ludhiana, who is acquainted with her father apprised her father on 17.8.2010 regarding the fact that the Amardeep Singh respondent is searching for a match for the marriage at Ludhiana in his relations. On coming to know about the said fact the appellant contacted Gurvinder Arora, Advocate on 18.8.2010 and came to know about the passing of the ex-parte decree against her and thereafter, she filed the present application. Respondent husband opposed the application on the ground that his wife was duly served and ex-parte proceedings were correctly initiated. It was further stated that previously parties had filed a petition for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the learned District Judge, Jalandhar on 8.1.2008. Statements of the parties were recorded. At the stage of second motion, on 13.8.2009, wife did not turn up and the divorce petition was dismissed. Thereafter, he had filed a regular divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 at Jalandhar. It was further stated that Jasminum Kaur had also filed a petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before the Ilaqa Magistrate, Ludhiana which was ultimately dismissed for non-prosecution. Respondent further stated that he has already re-married on 24.8.2010 after the passing of the divorce decree and that the application is time barred. From the pleadings, following issues were framed:-