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

U.C.MAHESHWARI, B.D.RATHI
Ajai Chaurasia – Appellant
Versus
Madhu Chaurasia – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant: Shri Sushant Tiwari, learned counsel

JUDGMENT

On behalf of appellant/plaintiff/applicant/husband of the respondent, this appeal is preferred under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, being aggrieved by the order dated 20.7.2015 passed by the Principal Judge of the Family Court, Datia in MJC No.1/2015 whereby allowing the application of the respondent filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay in filing the proceeding under Order IX, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree of divorce dated 24.9.2015 passed by the abovementioned court in HMA Case No.55/2013 filed by the appellant herein, the entire delay of near about one year in filing such proceeding of Order IX, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been condoned.

2. Appellant’s counsel after taking us through the appeal memo, the papers placed on the record along with impugned order argued that after filing petition under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act by the appellant herein in the aforesaid family court, the same was registered as HMA Case No.55/2013 and its notice was sent to the respondent through registered post with A.D. After service of the same, no-one appeared on he












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