Diksha Verma v. Siddharth Uppal

FAO-5297-2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH FAO-5297-2019 Date of decision : 25.11.2019 Diksha Verma ....Appellant V/s Siddharth Uppal ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. V.K. Jindal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Gopal Soni, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for the respondent. RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL) Marriage between the parties was solemnized on 25.09.2014 as per Hindu rites at Karnal. After marriage, petitioner and respondent lived together as husband and wife at Karnal itself. After lapse of some time, however, certain differences developed. Petitioner -husband alleged that respondent had a narrow mind set. She would make a mountain out of a molehill on trivial issues. She had developed a tendency to visit her parental house without any intimation to the petitioner. Similar more allegations were levelled. On these grounds, petitionerhusband filed a petition for divorce under section 13 of the Act before the Family court at Karnal. The court issued notice of the petition.

The matter was, however, referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre before written statement could be filed. Thereafter, parties appeared before the said Forum for exploring the possibility of settlement. It, however, appears that when the matter was still pending before the Mediation centre, the court proceeded further the main case. Stand of the appellant is that she remained oblivious of this, as she was regularly AJAY KUMAR 2019.12.05 11:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document appearing before the Forum for alternate dispute resolution.

FAO-5297-2019 the court proceeded ex-parte against her and passed a decree of divorce on 06.07.2019, the date on which the matter was referred back from the Mediation centre. Perusal of the judgment shows that it does not contain any detailed discussion as regards the cruelty alleged to have been inflicted by the respondent on the petitioner except a recent FIR of which investigation appears to be pending. Under the circumstances, we feel that matter needs to be remitted to the court below to be taken up from the same stage from where the appellant-wife was proceeded ex-parte. Impugned order is, thus, set-aside. Matter be remanded as indicated above.

Appeal is allowed in these terms.

The comments received from the Presiding Officer pursuant to order dated August 28, 2019 shall be dealt with administratively. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE November 25, 2019 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Ajay JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No AJAY KUMAR 2019.12.05 11:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document