ORDER :

1. This is an appeal preferred by the appellant under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 challenging the judgment and order dated 26th August, 2019 passed by the Family Court No. 6, Ahmedabad in Civil Misc. Application No. 51 of 2018, by which, the application for condonation of delay of 203 days in filing the application seeking restoration of the proceedings of Family Suit No. 775 of 2009 has been rejected.

2. The facts, giving rise to the present appeal, may be summarized as under:

2.1 The respondent had filed a Regular Civil Suit No. 720 of 2007 against the applicant in the Court of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), inter-alia, seeking to restrain the appellant, his servant etc. from selling or transferring the Flat No. F/303, Asavari Complex, Opposite Karnavati Club, Satellite, Ahmedabad along with other ancillary reliefs.

2.2 An application for interim injunction against the appellant was also made at the time of filing of the suit. The appellant was served with the summons of the said proceedings and he had appeared in the matter through his advocate. The said suit was transferred to the Family Court, Ahmedabad and was renumbered as Family Suit No. 775 of 2009. The appellant was once again served with the process in Family Suit No. 775 of 2009 and he appeared through his advocate. He contested the suit by filing the written statement vide Exh.15 on 12th April, 2010 and passed a purshis Exh.33 on 18th July, 2013 where he declared that he would not transfer the suit property without prior permission of the court. Accordingly, the Exh.6 was disposed of.

2.3 On 21st February, 2015, the Family Suit No. 775 of 2009 was dismissed for default as neither the respondent nor her advocate remained present. The appellant was intimated of the said dismissal by his learned advocate. The appellant visited the suit property in February, 2018 and learnt that the respondent had approached the Society to get the floor plans of the suit property. It was the matter of shock to him as he believed that after the dismissal of the family suit, the respondent had given up the claims in respect of the suit property. The appellant intimated his advocate and also had personally visited the Family Court at Ahmedabad and inspected the Family Suit No. 775 of 2009 on 06.03.2018 and 07.03.2018, upon which, he realized that an ex-parte judgment and decree was passed by the Family Court in Family Suit No. 775 of 2009 on 1st August, 2017. The appellant was under a bona-fide belief that after the dismissal of the Family Suit No. 775 of 2009 on 21st February, 2015, the respondent had not taken any steps for restoration of the proceedings and had waived and extinguished all her rights.

2.4 The respondent through her power of attorney had filed Civil Misc. Application No. 35 of 2015, seeking to restore the family suit on 4th April, 2015. It is the say of the appellant that he had not been validly served the process of Civil Misc. Application No. 35 of 2015 and consequently, an ex-parte order dated 28th October, 2016 was passed and thereby the Family Suit No. 775 of 2009 was restored. After the said suit was restored, the respondent did not make any attempt to effectively serve the notice and summons to the appellant. The respondent had attempted to show that the endorsement made by the bailiff over the process below Exh.36 in Family Suit No. 775 of 2009 is reflective of the fact that he was not served properly as the bailiff did not clearly state as to in which block the service was attempted. The RPAD was sent on an address separate from the address mentioned in the cause title of the suit and it came with an endorsement unclaimed. No attempt was made by the respondent for service upon the appellant as is being averred and alleged. It is further his say that subsequent to the restoration, it was imperative for the appellant to be served afresh the notice of the proceedings and the respondent had not moved any application for