SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(All) 828

B.L.YADAV, N.L.GANGULY
DEEP MALA SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
MAHESH SHARMA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.S.DIWAKAR, H.K.CHATURVEDI, H.N.Sharma

B. L. YADAV, J.

( 1 ) THE defendant-appellant, has filed the present First Appeal under Section 19 of the Family courts Act, 1984, against the judgment and order dated 18. 5 90 passed by the Judge, Family court, Jhansi in Misc. Caseno. 25/89 rejecting her restoration application along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1963 (for short the Act) under Article 123 of the Act the period of limitation to set aside an ex-parte decree was 30 days from the date of decree, or where summons or notice was not duly served, when the applicant had knowledge of the decree. The application for restoration was filed by the appellant (the wife) against the ex-parte decree dated 30. 5. 89 passed by the Family Court in Matrimonial case No. 65 of 1988 (Mahesh Sharma v. Smt. Deep Mala Sharma) under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, granting ex-parte decree for divorce in favour of the respondent (the husband) This restoration application was filed under order 9 rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (for short the code ).

( 2 ) THE material facts which are almost admitted, may be stated. A petition for divorce was filed by the respondent (the husband) against the ap




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top