VIJAY KUAMR Vs. KALPANA KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the rejection of the application filed by the applicant/appellant for setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree dtd. 9/1/2015, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H.P., in HMA No. 53 of 2013.

(2.) We have gone through the records of the case and find that the notices issued for the service of the appellant (respondent before the learned trial Court) had never been served upon him and despite that the learned trial Court has readily allowed the application filed by the petitioner (respondent herein) for substituted service and thereafter, proceeded to record the evidence of the respondent and eventually passed ex parte decree of divorce. It shall be apt to reproduce relevant orders, which read as under:-

(3.) It is extremely painful to note that despite the law being very well-settled, the courts below are resorting to substituted service callously and very casually that too at the initial stage of proceedings itself without even recording any satisfaction as mandated by the law and without directing the petitioner to take steps for serving the respondent by ordinary procedure as laid down in order 5 Rules 12, 15 & 17 of the Civil Procedure Code (for short, "CPC").