AMRITA KUMAR @ AMRITA DEVI D/O SHAMBHU RAJAK R/O MOHALLA Vs. JYOTISH KUMAR RAJAK S/O DASHRATH PRASAD RAJAK R/O MOHALLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal, under Sec. 19 of the Family Courts Act, has been filed by the defendant in the Matrimonial Case No. 110/2010, which was allowed on 04.04.2012, by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamui. The aforesaid matrimonial case was filed for dissolution of marriage on the ground of desertion and cruelty.

(2.) Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent, and with their consent, this appeal is being disposed of at this stage itself.

(3.) It appears that appellant was married to the respondent on 14.03.2007, in accordance with Hindu customs and rites. The appellant belongs to Bariyarpur, District - Munger, whereas the defendant belongs to District - Jamui, but works at Collectorate Lakhisarai, District - Lakhisarai. He is a class-III employee in the Collectorate. It appears that some dispute started from very beginning. However, in spite of disputes on 27.08.2008, the appellant, out of matrimonial alliance, gave birth to a baby boy on 27.08.2008. Since the time of birth of this baby boy, the appellant had been living with her father at Bariyarpur, and the respondent refused to take her back to her matrimonial house. Pursuant whereto, she filed complaint against the respondent in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger, bearing Complaint Case No. 690(C) of 2010, and also Maintenance Case No. 61M/2010, before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Munger. It appears in retaliation, the respondent also filed Bariyarpur P.S. Case No. 48/2010, alleging that on 04.04.2010, the family members of appellant took away the appellant and jewellery from the house of the respondent. The appellant, then, came to know that the respondent, her husband, had filed a matrimonial case being the present Matrimonial Case No. 110/2010, before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamui for divorce. She admits that she received summons in respect thereof, but on receipt of summons, she filed a transfer application before this Court being MJC No. 2390/2011, in which, on 04.08.2011, further proceedings in the courts below were ordered to be stayed, while notices were issued to the respondent. In view of the stay order granted by this Court, the appellant was under the impression that the proceedings in the matrimonial case at Jamui would have come to stand stayed. Later on, in the matrimonial case filed by the appellant before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Munger being Maintenance Case No. 61M/2010, the respondent appeared on 20.07.2012, and disclosed that the Matrimonial Case No. 110/2010 filed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamui had been allowed ex parte on 04.04.2012, and having waited for about three months, an appeal had not been filed. Upon knowing this, the appellant took certified copy of the court proceedings before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamui. It is admitted that in those proceedings not only summons were issued to the appellant, but newspaper publications were made. On coming to know and having obtained the certified copy, this present appeal has been filed.