JAGANMOHAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal has been referred to a Bench by our learned brother Qamar Hasan, J. , as it raises the following questions :- (1) Whether the remedy provided by Order 9, rule 13, is a substantive right like an appeal or review or is it a matter which falls within the expression procedure ? (2) Even assuming that it is a matter of procedure within the meaning of section 5 (4) of the Act, whether an appeal is available to the appellant under order 43, rule I (d), Civil Procedure Code, by way of analogy? (3) Whether untrammelled by all these technicalities, this is a fit case in which the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution must come to the aid of the appellant ?

( 2 ) THESE questions arose out of an application by the appellant-wife to set aside an ex parte decree obtained by her husband-respondent under section 5 (1) (c) of the madras Hindu (Bigamy Prevention and Divorce) Act (V of 1949) for the dissolution of his marriage with the appellant. In these proceedings a notice of the application under Order 5, rule 9 (3) of the Civil Procedure Code (Madras Amendment) was taken out on the nth March, 1953, but it was returned with a postal endorsement tha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document