Sharad S/O Mahadeo Sontakke v. Mrs. Savita Sharad Sontakke

1 fca5.19+1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.5 OF 2019 WITH FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.18 OF 2019 (SHARAD MAHADEO SONTAKKE...VS.. MRS SAVITA SHARAD SONTAKKE) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court'

s or Judge'

s orders appearances, Court'

s orders of directions and Registrar'

s orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri A.V.Bhide, Advocate for Appellant.

CORAM : Z.A.HAQ AND PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, JJ.

DATED : SEPTEMBER 20, 2019.

Heard.

Family Court Appeal No.5 of 2019 is filed by the appellant-husband under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act against the order condoning delay to file application for setting aside ex parte decree passed against the respondentwife and Family Court Appeal No.18 of 2019 challenges the order of setting aside ex parte decree dated 30/08/2018. We have perused the record and considered the submissions on behalf of the appellant. It is the grievance of the appellant that inspite of the stay order of this Court at Aurangabad Bench, the Family Court, Akola decided the application for setting aside ex parte decree. However, the learned Advocate for the appellant could not point out to this Court that the order of the Court at Aurangabad was brought to the notice of the Family Court at Akola. Secondly, it is the grievance of the appellant that without appreciating the evidence brought on record properly, the Family Court Akola has set aside the decree passed in favour of the appellant.

2 fca5.19+1 A perusal of the impugned judgment would reflect that while filing petition for divorce a wrong address of the respondent was provided before the Court and the respondent was not staying on that address. The decree for divorce is passed ex parte, wrongly recording that notice was served on the respondent. In our considered view, an opportunity should be given to the respondent to contest the divorce petition.

We do not find any fault in the order condoning delay and setting aside ex parte decree passed by the Family Court. The appeals lack merits. Hence, both the appeals are dismissed. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE RRaut..