An ex parte divorce decree is invalid if the court fails to ensure the necessary party's appearance, violating principles of natural justice.

JUDGMENT :

1. The instant appeal under section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is directed against the judgment dated 19.07.2023 passed in Original Suit No.952 of 2022 by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Additional Family Court - II, Ranchi (in short, learned Family Judge) whereby and whereunder the suit filed for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty by filing an application under Section 13 (1) (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been allowed.

2. This Court has taken sincere efforts on the issue of settlement, but, both the parties have not agreed on the issue of settlement and as such, this Court has gone into the merits of the case.

3. The brief facts of the case as per the pleadings made in the memo of appeal and as has also been incorporated in the impugned judgment reads as under:

(i) The case in brief is that the marriage between the petitioner-husband (respondent herein) and the opposite party-wife (appellant herein) was solemnized on 01.12.2021 according to Hindu Rites and customs in a banquet Hall at Sampatchak, Patna (Bihar) in presence of their relatives, friends, and well wishers. After solemnization of marriage, the opposite party came to the house of the petitioner and started living with him and his family members in her matrimonial home. The petitioner is practicing as Dentist at Singh More, Hatia and is the only son of his parents. His father has been superannuated from the post of Additional Secretary, Higher Education under the State of Jharkhand on 31.03.2018, while his mother is practicing Advocate at Ranchi and thus he belongs to a respected and reputed family.

(ii) After 3 to 4 days of marriage, the petitioner became shocked when the opposite party demanded wine and cigarette from him. At the first instance, the petitioner thinks that she is joking, but thereafter, she pressurized him to fulfill her demand as early as possible and told him that she cannot control herself without taking wine and cigarettes and if he refuses to fulfill her demand, she herself will go to the market and purchase those items. The petitioner took it casually and tried to make her understand, but she became arrogant and threatened him to face dire consequences and that she will auction the respect and reputation of his family in the open market. When the mother of the petitioner asked the opposite party to come and assist her in cooking food for the family, so that she could learn about the taste of the family members and it will be ease her to take the charge of family in her absence, she straight forward denied to do so and told that she is an educated lady who didn't marry her son for cooking food for the family, so, it will be better to employee a maid for cooking and other allied purposes. The opposite party started going out of the residence for taking drinks and returned late night. When she was opposed by the petitioner and his parents, she started shouting and quarrel with them, but she didn't leave her habits rather, she used to keep wines and cigarettes with her all the times and whenever she likes, take drinks in home also in spite of this the opposite party never tried or interested to the same and told that she is not interested with males, having her habit of (Homosex) with same gender (girls) hence she never like to quench the sexual thrust of her husband and the life of petitioner became hell.

(iii) The petitioner invested a sum to the tune of Rs. 17,80,000/- for purchasing Creta Car to the satisfaction of the Opposite party and he shifted her in the 2^nd floor of his house, so that she could live se