Mrs. Rekha Mittal, J.:- The present appeal has been directed against the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 21.01.2014 passed by the District Judge, Pathankot, allowing the petition filed by the respondent (husband) for dissolution of marriage of the parties under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

2. The parties tied marital knot on 01.03.2008 at Sujjanpur, Tehsil and District Pathankot. The respondent prayed for a decree of divorce levelling allegations against the appellant that she is guilty of subjecting her husband to cruelty and withdrawing from his society without any reasonable cause or excuse. It is averred that she refused to consummate the marriage and declared that he was not a man of her liking. She used to taunt by saying that her husband had an ugly face. She used to pick up quarrels on petty matters and had been leaving the matrimonial home without consent of the respondent. She even threatened to involve the respondent in some false case. She along with her sister and brother-in-law caused injuries to his parents for which FIR under Sections 324, 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the accused. She deserted the respondent for a period of more than two years before filing of the petition.

3. The appellant was proceeded against ex-parte as she failed to appear in the Court after publication of the notice in newspaper Daily Jagbani on 03.12.2013.

4. To substantiate his allegations, the respondent examined himself, Kirpal Singh PW2 and Kuldeep Singh, his uncle PW3.

5. The learned trial Court on appreciation of ex-parte evidence adduced by the respondent determined that the appellant (wife) is guilty of causing cruelty to her husband and deserting him for more than two years before filing the petition.

6. Feeling aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court, the instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant (wife).

7. Counsel for the appellant contends that apart from the fact that the respondent (husband) has failed to allege much less prove that the appellant (wife) is guilty of causing cruelty of the magnitude that can constitute a valid ground for divorce, the ex-parte decree passed by the trial Court cannot be allowed to sustain for want of due service of the appellant and thus depriving her of her valuable right to defend the proceedings before the trial Court. To substantiate his contention, he has carried us through the jimni orders dated 01.10.2013 and 05.12.2013 passed by the learned trial Court whereby it was ordered to serve the appellant through substituted service by way of publication in Daily Jagbani. It is argued that the respondent was neither tendered the summons sent by the Court nor she ever refused to accept service, therefore, the order passed by the trial Court ordering service through publication is illegal and cannot form the basis for substitute service and later initiation of ex-parte proceedings on the basis of publication of notice in Daily Jagbani.

8. Counsel for the respondent would contend that as the appellant refused to accept the summons, a copy of the summon was affixed at the outer door of the house in which she was residing and the report made by the concerned Process Server is duly attested by Sh.Subhash Chand. It is further argued that the appellant could be proceeded against ex-parte on the basis of report of evading service and affixation of copy of the summon on the outer door of her house but the learned trial Court still got the notice published in the newspaper Daily Jagbani. It is further argued that as the appellant intentionally did not appear in the trial proceedings, it is sufficient to show that she had nothing to say to controvert the allegations set out in the petition.

9. We have heard counsel for the parties and perused the records.

10. Before adverting to the merits of the case, it would be appropriate to examine if the orders passed by the trial Court on the basis whereof the ex-parte proceed