PATNA HIGH COURT
P. B. Bajanthri and Arun Kumar Jha, JJ.
Shila Devi – Appellant
versus
Milind Kumar Singh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Appeal No.764 of 2013
Decided on 1.3.2024
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 12 (1) (a) & (b) read with Section 5 (ii) (b) – Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Order 5 Rule 20 – Annulment of marriage by ex-parte decree – Mental illness and impotency of wife – Substituted service has to be resorted as last resort when defendant cannot be served in ordinary way and Court is satisfied that there is reason to believe that defendant is keeping out of way for the purpose of avoiding service, or that for any other reason summons cannot be served in ordinary way – Trial court has almost instantly allowed the prayer without recording satisfaction about prerequisites for exercise of power under Order 5 Rule 20 of CPC – Family Court was not expected to function in a mechanical manner and tread so casually in the matter – Service of summons to a wife in a matrimonial dispute concerning divorce is a serious matter because it concerns entire life of spouse against whom a decree of divorce has been sought and service cannot be presumed – Wife was not duly served with notice and procedure adopted for directing substituted service being vitiated, wife has demonstrated sufficient cause for her non-appearance before Family Court on the date when she was proceeded ex-parte – Impugned Judgment set aside and matter remitted back to Family Court for decision afresh in accordance with law and on its own merits. (Paras 12, 13, 14 and 17)
Result: Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT (CAV)
Arun Kumar Jha, J.—The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant/wife (for brevity ‘wife’) against the judgment and decree dated 04.02.2013 and 19.02.2013, respectively passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Munger in Title Suit (Matrimonial) No.97 of 2008 whereby and whereunder the petition dated 09.07.2008 filed by the respondent/husband (for brevity ‘husband’) against wife under Section 12 (1) (a) & (b) read with Section 5 (ii) (b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) has been allowed ex-parte and, accordingly, the suit was decreed annulling the marriage between the parties by decree of nullity.
2. Briefly stated the case of husband, as it appears from the records, is that the parties are Hindus. They were married on 26.06.1991. Thereafter, both the parties started living together as husband and wife. Husband came to realize that wife was suffering from some mental disorder. Thereafter, she was taken to doctor at Naugachiya from where she was referred to Psychiatrist and, as such, she was taken to Ranchi where she was diagnosed as suffering from ‘schizophrenia’. Thereafter, she got attack of ‘schizophrenia’ on 21.09.1999 and was treated by Dr. S.P. Sinha. Thereafter, as per advice of doctor, she was admitted in Central Institute of Psychiatry, Kanke, Ranchi where she was declared as afflicted with ‘schizophrenia’ and it was also detected that wife was suffering from ‘schizophrenia’ and it was influenced by genetics and she was lunatic at the time of marriage. On account of persistent repugnance on the part of wife to the act of consummation, the marriage was not consummated and it was claimed by husband that she was impotent at the time of marriage. On 30.01.2003, wife left her matrimonial house and went to Dumka to reside with her mother. Despite efforts of husband, wife did not join him and wife filed a complaint Case No.343/2005 under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code, which was converted into Town P.S. Case No.215 of 2005. Wife also filed a maintenance case under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the Family Court, Dumka in the year 2005 in which the learned Principal Judge, Family Court directed husband to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- per month as ad-interim relief to wife. Thereafter, husband filed a matrimonial case under Section 12 (1) (a) & (b) read with Section 5 (ii) (b) of the Hindu Marriage Act bearing Title Suit (Matrimonial) No.97 of 2008 in which notice was issued to wife, but she did not appear. Due to non-appearance of wife, the Title Suit (Matrimonial) No.97 of 2008 proceeded ex-parte in terms of order dated 10.11.2009. On the basis of pleadings and depositions, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Munger declared the marriage of wife as nullity vide impugned judgment dated 04.02.2013 and decree dated 19.02.2023, which is under challenge before this Court.
3. The learned counsel for wife submitted that while passing the impugned judgment and decree dated 04.02.2013 and 19.02.2013, respectively, the learned Family Court completely ignored and discarded the fact that though husband appeared, filed show cause and produced the witnesses before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dumka in Cr. Misc. Case No. 133 of 2005 and a proceeding under Section 125 (4) & (5) of Cr.P.C., but husband never informed the learned Family Court as well as wife or her conducting lawyer at Dumka about the pendency of the Title Suit (Matrimonial) No.97 of 2008. The learned counsel further submitted that the respondent managed the office, resulting thereof, no notice was ever served upon wife. The learned counsel further submitted that the impugned judgment and decree under appeal are based on erroneous consideration as the learned court below completely ignored and discarded the fact that there was no material to substantiate that there was valid service upon wife as is evident from the order sheet of the Title Suit (Matrimonial) No.97 of 200
Annulment of marriage by ex-parte decree – Service of summons to a wife in a matrimonial dispute concerning divorce is a serious matter and service cannot be presumed.
Ex-parte decree of divorce – Substituted service has to be resorted as last resort when defendant cannot be served in ordinary way – Ex-parte judgment passed against appellant set aside.
The court emphasized the necessity of proper service of summons in divorce proceedings, ruling that failure to comply with procedural requirements invalidates ex parte judgments.
The main legal point established is that the service of notice in legal proceedings should be real and meaningful, not a mere formality, to allow the other party to represent themselves before the co....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.