Y Manoj Kumar v. Y Gautami

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE V. RAMASUBRAMANI AN C.R.P.No.1816 of 2018 ORDER:

Aggrieved by the dismissal of an application for summoning the respondent for cross-examination in an application filed by the respondent for setting aside the ex-parte decree, the petitioner/husband has come up with the above revision petition.

2. Heard Mr. G. Vasantha Rayudu, learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. It is not necessary to summon the respondent for crossexamination, to disprove the averments made by her in her application for setting aside the ex-parte decree. According to the petitioner, the respondent has been residing in Scotland for the past few years, but she has made false statements in the affidavit as though she is residing in Hyderabad. But this fact can be easily established by merely summoning the production of Xerox copies of the pass-port, with relevant pages containing the entries relating to immigration stamping.

4. Therefore, the dismissal of the petition by the trial Court cannot be found to be erroneous. Hence the civil revision petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to explore other possibilities. There shall be no order as to costs.

5. As sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending in this revision, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________ JUSTI CE V. RAMASUBRAMANI AN 23rd March, 2018 Js.

VRS,J CRP.No.1816 /2018 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE V. RAMASUBRAMANI AN C.R.P.No.1816 of 2018 23rd March, 2018 Js.