JUDGMENT :

Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent.

I.A. No. 2843 of 2017

2. The aforementioned Interlocutory Application was preferred for condoning the delay of 30 days in filing the present appeal.

3. It appears that notices were issued in the limitation matter to the sole respondent vide order dated 29.8.2017. The office note dated 18.10.2017 reflects that notices were validly served upon the respondent and she entered appearance through her counsel but the delay was condoned vide order dated 27.11.2017, when none appeared on behalf of the sole respondent.

4. The present Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed for setting aside the judgment dated 01.08.2016 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Lakhisarai in Matrimonial Case No. 14 of 2016 whereby the appellant has been directed to restitute the conjugal rights with the respondent.

5. The factual matrix of the case is that the respondent claimed to have performed marriage with the appellant in the year 2011 at Rajgir with consent of the appellant in accordance with the Hindu rites. Receipt nos. 297 and 298 dated 12.6.2011 were issued by Rajgrih Tirth Raksharth Panda Samiti, Rajgir in