Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Devendra Kumar vs Smt. Poonam Devi on 9 July, 2018
Bench: Pradeep Nandrajog, Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2079/2015
Devendra Kumar S/o Late Shri Harji Ram, aged about 35, B/c
Devasi, R/o Pratap Nagar, Sadar Thana Second Row, Rani
Station, Tehsil Desuri, District Pali. At present Jyoti Kirana Store,
Owalanaka, District Than, Goudbandar Road, Mumbai
(Maharashtra).
----Appellant
Versus
Smt. Poonam Devi D/o Mula Ram, B/c Devasi, R/o 154, Gurlai
Marg, 2 Tanki Circle, Near Urban Bank, Pali.
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr.C.P.Soni
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order 09/07/2018
1. Till date notice has not been issued in the appeal nor in the application seeking delay to be condoned in filing the appeal.
2. The appeal lays challenge to the judgment dated 06.07.2015 granting decree of divorce to the respondent. The impugned decision would show that after the appellant was served counsel entered appearance. Time was granted to file reply. No reply was filed. Nobody appeared for the appellant after 18.12.2014. On 04.02.2015 he was proceeded against exparte.
3. The impugned decision shows that the respondent not only examined herself as AW-1 but even her father as AW-2 and three documents including the FIR registered against the appellant for (2 of 2) [CMA-2079/2015] offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC were proved.
4. Regretfully the appellant did not file an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of Code of Civil Procedure showing sufficient cause for not appearing on day when he was proceeded against exparte.
5. In the appeal the appellant admits that notice had been served by registered post on him and he appeared through a counsel.
6. Challenge in the appeal is to the judgment on merits. The grounds are vague. It is simply pleaded that the appellant did not subject the respondent to the alleged physical and mental cruelty. On oath the respondent stated that on account of dowry she was physically assaulted on 25.01.2014 when she was in a family way. Her testimony regarding the incident which took place on 27.02.2013, 08.03.2014 and 13.05.2014 have thus to be accepted.
7. We find no merit in the appeal and dismiss the same. (DINESH MEHTA),J (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG),CJ Kshama Dixit/37 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)