The court emphasized the necessity of proper service of notice in family law proceedings to uphold the right to a fair hearing, determining that procedural missteps can lead to serious miscarriages of justice.

Judgment :

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

1. The instant appeal has been filed challenging the legality and propriety of impugned judgment passed ex-parte on 18.04.2024 and decree signed on 02.05.2024 by learned Additional Principal Judge, Additional Family Court-II, Dhanbad whereby and whereunder the Original Suit No. 545 of 2023 filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for a decree of divorce has been allowed and marriage solemnized between both the parties has been dissolved.

2. It has been pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the parties by referring the order dated 17.02.2026 passed by this Court by which the matter was sent for mediation under the “Mediation for the Nation Drive 2.0”, the mediation has failed, as per the report available on record.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the parties have jointly submitted that the matter now needs to be heard on merit.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the appeal has been filed after delay of 204 days and for condoning the aforesaid delay, application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

I.A. No.2923 of 2025

5. The instant appeal is barred by delay of 204 days, therefore, the instant Interlocutory Application has been filed for condoning the aforesaid delay.

6. Mr. Aditya Baneerjee, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the judgment passed by he learned Additional Family Judge, which is impugned in the present appeal, is ex-parte and the appellant has not been provided an opportunity to contest the case.

7. It has been submitted that somehow the appellant came to know about the impugned judgment. Thereafter, the copy of the judgment has been obtained along with the order-sheets of the suit.

8. It has been submitted that learned Principal Judge, Family Court has directed for filing requisites for appearance of the respondent through Nazarat, Speed post and WhatsApp or e-mail, if any and the office has been directed to issue the same and also intimate the respondent about the case over mobile phone call, what's app or SMS if it be possible.

9. Thereafter, the case was transferred in the court of learned Additional Principal Judge-II, Additional Family Court No-II, Dhanbad for final disposal fixing the case on 11.07.2023.

10. On 11.07.2023, the petitioner-husband filed postal receipt, track report of the notice sent through Speed post and a petition for paper publication.

11. The notice upon the present appellant has been deemed to be accepted after paper publication.

12. It has been contended that so far as the issue of communicating about the pending proceeding through Speed post, an order was passed by the learned Family Judge on 05.06.2023 to issue notice also over mobile phone call, what's app or SMS, if it is possible.

13. It has been submitted that the leaned Family Judge has not bothered to consider the issue of sending the notice either through mobile phone call, what's app or SMS since there is no reference in the order-sheet said to be made by the office clerk.

14. It has been submitted by referring the order dated 11.07.2023 that the learned Family Judge has passed an order after filing of the postal receipt and track report and simultaneously the petition for paper publication was also filed. An order was passed on that date i.e., on 11.07.2023 that by granting liberty to the petitioner to file draft notice with a direction upon the office to issue the same after verification.

15. It has further been submitted by referring to the order dated 18.08.2023 that the newspaper cutting has been filed and based upon the same, the notice upon the appellant, the defendant to the