Sau. Vaishali Ajay Deore v. Shri Ajay Janardan Deore

1/2 caf-132-16.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.132 OF 2016 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.29 OF 2013 ...

Sau.Vaishali Ajay Deore ....Applicant In the matter between Sau.Vaishali Ajay Deore ...Appellant v/s.

Shri Ajay Janardan Deore

...Respondent

...

Mr.Prashant D.Patil for the Applicant.

Mr.S.P.Thorat for the Respondent.

...

CORAM : A.S.OKA & A.A. SAYED, JJ.

DATED : 9 JUNE 2016 P.C.:

This is an Application made by the Applicant/wife for restoration of the Family Court Appeal preferred by her, which was dismissed on account of failure of the Advocate for the Applicant to remove an office objection in the Family Court Appeal. The office objection was that a copy for effecting service of notice on the Respondent was not supplied. In the Appeal, the challenge is to the decree of divorce passed by the Family Court on the Petition filed by the Respondent/husband. Uday.P.Kambli 1/2

2/2 caf-132-16.doc 2.

Learned Counsel for the Respondent/husband states that he has no instructions to appear, as he has returned the papers. 3.

We have perused the order of the Registrar (Judicial-II) dated 11 December 2015. By the said order, he directed the Applicant to supply a copy of the Appeal for effecting service on the Respondent/husband. However, we find that the day on which the said order was passed, the Respondent/husband was already represented by an Advocate, who is present today. Therefore, there was no occasion to issue a fresh notice to the Respondent/husband. Hence, a case for restoration of the Family Court Appeal is made out. Accordingly, the Application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). Registry is directed to issue a notice of restoration of the Appeal to the Respondent/husband, returnable on 29 July 2016.

(A.A. SAYED, J.) (A.S.OKA, J.) Uday.P.Kambli 2/2