HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3745 / 2013
Mukesh S/o Bhagnaram, B/c Lodha, R/o Village Kuchawati, Tehsil
Smt Rani Kumari W/o Mukesh D/o Rambabu, B/c Lodha, R/o
Kalyanpur, Kallu Ka Nagla, Distt. Agra, Uttar Pradesh.
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Reashm Bhargava.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manoj Pareek.
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G R MOOLCHANDANI
(1) Learned Counsel for the respondent states that inspite
of registered letters being sent to the respondent she is not
contacting the Counsel.
(2) The appellant sued for divorce and the respondent was
served by publication. She was proceeded against ex-parte.
Decree for divorce was granted ex-parte on 11.05.2009. The
respondent filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code
of Civil Procedure pointing out that the newspaper in which
publication was effected was other than the one in which citation
had to be published. This has influenced the learned Judge, Family
Court to pass the impugned order dated 10.10.2013. Application
filed by the respondent under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil
(2 of 3)
Procedure has been allowed. Ex-parte decree of divorce dated
11.05.2009 has been recalled.
(3) During the pendency of the proceedings in this Court
the parties entered into a settlement because the respondent had
initiated multifarious proceedings against the appellant including a
FIR for offence punishable under Section 406 IPC. The settlement
has been recorded by the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Misc.
Appeal No.6569/2016- Mukesh Ors. Vs. State of U.P. Anr.
The decision is dated 23.01.2017. Certified copy of the said
decision has been placed on record which shows that the appellant
has paid in full and final settlement of all dues of the respondent
`4,50,000/-. She had received the money by a demand draft. The
respondent has agreed to give consent for the marriage to be
dissolved with consent. Custody of the child is with the
respondent. The right of the child over the property of the
appellant has been kept intact. It is obviously a case where the
respondent having received `4,50,000/- is no longer interested in
the proceedings. She is a resident of Agra. She is not even
contacting her Counsel. The settlement between the parties
records that even as per the respondent the marriage has
irrevocably and irretrievably broken down.
(4) Since the respondent has got her dues and is not
cooperating it would be appropriate to set aside the impugned
order and restore the decree of divorce noting that merely
because citation was published in a wrong newspaper. This is
irrelevant. The newspaper in which the citation was published was
published in Agra and had circulation in Agra.
(3 of 3)
(5) The appeal is allowed. Impugned order dated
10.10.2013 is set aside. Ex parte decree dated 11.05.2009 is
(6) No costs.
(G R MOOLCHANDANI)J. (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG)C.J.