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

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
PEMA SHERPA – Appellant
Versus
MANOJ KARTIK BAKSHI – Respondent
CR 1567 2021



CR-1567-2021

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

CR-1567 of 2021 (O&M)

Date of decision: 16.08.2021

Pema Sherpa

...Petitioner

Versus

Manoj Kartik Bakshi

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.S. MADAAN

Present:

Mr. Dixit Garg, Advocate for the petitioner.

H.S. MADAAN

, J. (Oral)

Case taken up through video conferencing.

In a petition filed by Manoj Kartik Bakshi against his wife

Pema Sherpa, which was pending before Principal Judge, Family Court,

Jalandhar, notice of the said petition was issued to respondent in that

petition, namely, Pema Sherpa mentioned as Prem Shepra, in the

impugned order; she was served by way of publication in daily

newspaper 'The Hindustan Times' on 03.11.2020 but did not put in

appearance, as such, was proceeded against ex parte, vide impugned

order dated 01.04.2021; the said order is being challenged by the

respondent in that petition before this Court by way of filing the instant

revision petition.

It is very strange that the present revisionist instead of

approaching the trial Court by way of filing an application under Order 9

Rule 7 CPC, craving for setting aside of ex parte proceedings by

rendering necessary explanation for previous non-appearance, has chosen

SUMIT KUMAR

2021.08.16 15:06

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

CR-1567-2021

-2-

to rush to this Court by way of filing the present petition.

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of relegating

the revisionist to the remedy of approaching the trial Court by way of

filing an appropriate application there for setting aside of ex parte order

and proceedings and the trial Court would dispose of the said application

in accordance with law in the light of settled principles that no litigant

should be condemned unheard and it is endeavour of the Courts to decide

a lis on merits, rather than, non-suiting a party on technical grounds.

16.08.2021

(H.S. MADAAN)

sumit.k

JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes

No

Whether Reportable :

Yes

No

SUMIT KUMAR

2021.08.16 15:06

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top