Sri Punna Santhosh v. Smt. P. Swapna
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
[ 2697 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI IVIL REVISI TITION NO: 2449 OF Petition Under Arlicle 227 of the constitution of lndia against the Order dated 2610712023 Passed in LA. No. 1 I ot 2023 in FC Op No. 1000 of 201 6 on the fite of the Court of the Additional Family Court, R. R. district at L.B.Nagar. Between:
Sri Punna Santhosh, S/o. P. Sudharshan, age 43 years, Occ. Business, Rt/o. H.t$.2-3-45711, Plot No.6, Road No.3, Sainagar Cotony, Nagote, Hyderabad68.
...Petitioner/RespondenUPetitioner
AND Smt. P. Swapna, Wo. P. Santhosh, Aged Thodati Rajasekhar Reddy, S/o. Thodati Mohan Reddy, Age 40 years, Occ. House-wife, Ft/o. H. No. 11-13-8612, Plot No. 1O, Haripuri Colony, Saroornagar, Hyderabad-3s, Telangana State.
...RespondenUPetitioner/Respondent lA NO: 2 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased lo receive the additional documents, medical reports in CRP.No.2449 of 2023 with the interest of justice and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. IAN :1OF 2O23 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to Stay all further proceedings in FCOP No. 1000/2016 on the file of the Additional District Judge, R.R. District at L.B.Nagar, pending disposal of the Revision.
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRl. V M KRISHNA REDDY Counsel forthe Respondents: SRl. MANDA ADAM The Court made the following: ORDER t
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI c LR ISIO PETI ON o.244 oF2 23 ORDER:
This Civil Revision petition, under Article 227 of the constitution of India, is fired by the petitioner-husband aggrieved by the order, dated 26.07.2023, passed in LA.No.19 of 2023 in F.C.O.P.No.1000 of 2016 by the learned ludge, Additional Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar.
2.
Heard Sri V.M. Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner-husband and Sri Manda Adam, learned counser for the respondent-wife.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner had contended that the petitioner has fired the subject F.c.o.p. seeking dissorution of his marriage with the respondent and the learned Family Court was pleased to dissolve the marriage vide order and decree, dated 19.12.2022. Thereafter, the respondent_wife filed the subject I.A.No.19 of 2023 seeking to set aside the order and decree, dated 19.12.2022, contending that she could not lead her evidence before the tearned Family Court as she was suffering with fever and that the learned Family Court has granted ex pafte decree of divorce. The learned Family Court, vide impugned order, dated 26.07.2023, was pleased to set aside the ex parte
-Y.$ AKS.J C.R.P.No.24,19 of2023 decree, dated 19.12.2022, and permitted the respondent to contest the case, without appreciating any of the contentions raised by the petitioner. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the Civil Revision Petition by setting aside the impugned order, dated 26.07.2023.
4.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent had contended that the respondent could not lead her evidence before the Court below, as she was suffering with fever. The moment the respondent came to know about th€ passing of ex parte decree of divorce, she filed the subject I.A. seeking to set aside the same and the learned Family Court, in the interest of justice, has rightly allowed the subject I.A. preferred by the respondent. Therefore, there are no merits in the Civil Revision Petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
5.
This Court, having considered th€ rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, is of the considered vi€w that the learned Family Court has granted ex pa rte decree of divorce in favour of the petitiofter. Seeking to set aside the same, the respondent has filed the subject I'A' and the sarne was allowed vrUe impugned order, dated 26.07.2023' This Court is of the considered view that the learned Family court was justified in allowing the subject I.A. filed by the respondent' No prejudice
J wourd be caused to the nptir;^ npx..:als"ffi]i petitioner' if the respondent contests the rits. Therefore, this Couft is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order, dated 26.07.2023. 6.
Accordingly, the C sha, be no order ". ," .i;:.*"vision subject F.c.o.p. on ,""
I Petition is dismissed' There Miscellaneous peti petition sha, srand .,"r"::"'
iF anv, pending in this Civir Revision SD/.A.V.S. PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR IfiRUECOPYII SECTTON OFFICER To, i i[: E;[:iiT*ff,:ut :i,*.tl["*E; rx';h ADK MY
HIGH COURT DATED:2911212023 i 1trE STAre
ORDER
3 0 JA\ 202[ oo L-) {- * Drq. .l,-';('
GRP.No.2449 ot 2023 DISMISSING THE CRP W'THOUT COSTS Ir ??
^ -L,,t