RASAN TRIGUN BARLA Vs. RILAN SANDHYA TOPPNO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit under Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (hereinafter referred to as the Act)for dissolution of his marriage with defendant No. 1 on the ground of adultery. The alleged adulterer was impleaded as defendant No. 2. In the suit notice were issued to the defendant, who appeared and prayed for time for filing written statement. But thereafter they remained absent, resulting in ex parte judgment dissolving the marriage of the plaintiff with defendant No. 1. The ex parte judgment was recalled on the application of defendant No. 1 under Order IX, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Thereafter written statement was filed. On 15.10.1996 a joint application was filed by both the parties, i.e. husband and wife, in the Court below seeking dissolution of marriage and for passing consent decree of divorce. The Court below after hearing the parties decreed the suit in terns of the compromise. On 18.11.1996 the decree for dissolution of marriage was prepared. The said decree has been sent for confirmation under Sections 17 and 20 of the Act to this Court.

(2.) After receipt of the records from the Court below for confirmation, notices were issued to the defendants, but inspite of personal service on them none has appeared on their behalf.

(3.) We have ourself perused the whole records of the case. It appears that the case for dissolution of marriage set up by the plaintiff has almost been admitted-by the defendants. There is neither any contest nor any opposition against the confirmation of the divorce decree.