ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY Vs. POONAM JAISHWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. P.P.N. Roy, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Ms. Amrita Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the sole opposite party.

(2.) This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, wherein prayer has been made for setting aside the orders dtd. 12/10/2022 and 13/3/2024, passed in Civil Miscellaneous Case No. 23 of 2022, by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamshedpur, by which, the learned court has been pleased to admit the petition filed under Order-IX rule-13 read with Sec. 151 of the CPC by the sole opposite party and condone the limitation by the said orders, in view of that the aforesaid two orders are under challenge herein.

(3.) Mr. Roy, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein instituted a suit, being Matrimonial Suit No. 64 of 2015 for dissolution of marriage before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur against the sole opposite party filed under Ss. 13(1)(i-a)(1-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act. He submits in that case, the notices were sent to the sole opposite party through the post and paper publication of notice was also made in the local newspaper having the circulation in the district of Bhagalpur (Bihar), but the opposite party has not appeared before the learned court. He then submits that the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamshedpur by its judgment dtd. 15/9/2016 and decree dtd. 26/9/2016 passed an ex-parte order of divorce and allowed the matrimonial Suit No. 64 of 2015. He submits that in this background, a petition under Order-IX Rule-13 read with Sec. 151 of the CPC was filed being Civil Misc. Case No. 23 of 2022 by the sole opposite party before the learned court, which has been admitted by order dtd. 12/10/2022 and notice was issued and it was posted for 6/12/2022. He submits that the learned court has erred in admitting the said petition by order dtd. 12/10/2022 without condoning the delay and thereafter on 13/3/2024, the learned court has condoned the delay after hearing both the sides in view of that there is procedural defect and to buttress his argument, he relied in the case of Paras Nath Keshari Versus Dwarika Prasad Keshari and Ors., reported in 2008(3) JLJR 298 (Jhr).