← Library
Patna High CourtMA/470/2013dismissed

Vinod Kumar Choubey v. Sangeeta Mishra

2015-06-26Justice Smt. Nilu Agrawal,Mr. Justice V.N. Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Appeal No.470 of 2013 =========================================================== Vinod Kumar Choubey, S/O Late Birendra Choubey, Resident of Vill. and P.OBabhnaul, P.S- Dawath, Distt- Rohtas. .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

Sangeeta Mishra, W/O Vinod Kr. Choubey and D/O Uma Kant Mishra, Resident of Vill. Mishrawalia, P.O- Malaur, P.S- Charpokhri, Distt- Bhojpur. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr.

For the Respondent/s : Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA) Date: 26-06-2015 Delay of 22 days in filing the memo of appeal is condoned, as we are satisfied after perusing the contents of the interlocutory application that appellant was prevented by sufficient cause in not preferring the present appeal in time.

2. I.A. No. 4312 of 2013 is, accordingly, disposed of.

3. Having condoned the delay we consider the merit of the appeal. Appellant is the husband. By filing this appeal he has assailed judgment dated 26.02.2013, passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhojpur at Ara, in Matrimonial Case No. 4 of 2009 whereunder request of the wife to dissolve her marriage with the appellant has been decreed in favour of the wife. From perusal of the

Patna High Court MA No.470 of 2013 dt.26-06-2015 2/2 impugned judgment, it appears that the court below discussed issue nos. 1, 4 in the light of the evidence adduced by the parties i.e. P.W. 1 the wife, P.W. 2 Uma Kant Mishra her father and P.W. 3 her sister and her husband O.P. No. 1. Having considered the evidence the court below found in paragraph 9 that the wife has been deserted by her husband from 2002 and in appreciation of such fact divorce was allowed and their marriage was dissolved.

4. We see no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment. Appeal is dismissed.

(V.N. Sinha, J) (Nilu Agrawal, J) Rajesh/- U T