ORDER

Heard both sides.

2. This revision is in challenge of an ex-parte order under Sec.3(2) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act (for short, “the Act”). As per the impugned order, petitioner has been directed to pay a total sum of Rs.453800/- to the respondent. According to the petitioner, respondent has obtained an ex-parte decree for divorce based on which she preferred the petition under Sec.3(2) of the Act and even though his proper address abroad was known to the respondent, notice was caused to be issued to him in his local address which has returned with the endorsement that he went abroad. Later, a paper publications is said to have been effected based on which petitioner was set ex-parte order and evidence of respondent was recorded. According to the petitioner, he has already filed an application in the Family Court to set aside the ex-parte decree for divorce. Petitioner seeks an opportunity to contest the petition claiming that he had no notice of the proceeding in the court below. Learned counsel for respondent contended that appropriate substituted service was affected before petitioner set ex-parte.

3. Question for consideration is whether petition