Gujarat High Court
Sima Kantilal Khant vs Stavan Jayantilal Lakhadharia on 17 June, 2025
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/2695/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2695 of 2024
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2024
In
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2695 of 2024
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE) NO. 2 of 2024
In
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2695 of 2024
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR MAINTENANCE) NO. 3 of 2024
In
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2695 of 2024
=======================================================================
SIMA KANTILAL KHANT
Versus
STAVAN JAYANTILAL LAKHADHARIA
=======================================================================
Appearance:
MR. SAHIL M SHAH(6318) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR H I SHAH(11465) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
MR NEEL P LAKHANI(10679) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
=======================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
Date : 17/06/2025
ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE)
1. The present appeal is filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act read with Section 19 of the Family Courts Act,. 1984 challenging judgment and decree dated 22.08.2023 passed by the Family Court, Vadodara in Family Suit No.44 of 2020.
2. The original proceedings are initiated by the respondent-husband under Section 13(1)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking divorce, where marriage was solemnized on 18.05.2013 as per Hindu rites and rituals and was registered under the Gujarat Registration of Marriages Act.
Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Thu Jun 19 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Jun 19 21:43:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2695/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025 undefined
3. The appellant before the Court is the wife, who is pursuing her studies in Chartered Accountancy whereas respondent-husband is working as a Professor in Government Engineering College at Bhavnagar. Having developed incompatibility in their matrimonial relationship, proceedings were initiated on the ground of cruelty and desertion by the husband.
4. The main contention of the appellant-wife is that the impugned judgment and decree was pronounced ex-parte and in fact, entire proceedings were proceeded ex-parte as the notice issued by the Family Court was never served upon the appellant. 4.1 It is the case of the appellant that it was within the knowledge of the respondent-husband that the appellant is residing at Vadodara. However, service of the notice of the Family Court, Vadodara was affected on the parents of the appellant at Jamnagar through RPAD in December 2021. According to the appellant, the parents of the appellant were actually farmers engaged in agricultural activities, not being well acquainted with the legal procedures and did not realize importance of the notice. Ultimately, the appellant was kept in dark with regard to entir4e proceedings when the proceedings had been taken up by the Family Court ex-parte.
5. Learned Advocate for the respondent-husband, though Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Thu Jun 19 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Jun 19 21:43:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2695/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025 undefined initially objected to the appeal, was unable to respond to the averments made in the appeal with regard to ineffective service of notice by the Family Court from the beginning.
6. The Court has perused the documents on record and considered the timeline by which the Family Court had proceeded with the trial of the Family Suit, where, in para-3 of the judgment, it is recorded that the notice was issued to the respondent by RPAD and the endorsement was made on the envelop of RPAD as having been returned with refusal. The Court had considered the track consignment reports, which supported the endorsement regarding refusal to take notice of the Postal Department and thereafter, application given by learned Advocate for the respondent-husband vide Exh.9 declaring that the appellant herein (original respondent) has been duly served with the notice and she has not taken care to remain present before the Family Court. Based on such documents, the trial in the Family Suit proceeded ex-parte.
7. Admittedly, therefore, the appellant has not been given effective chance to represent her case. Not only that, averments made by the appellant in paras-D and E with regard to proceedings and Rojkam recorded in the "Nari Adalat" with regard to her matrimonial issued would indicate that the appellant was quite vigilant with regard to her rights and but for such endorsement of the Postal Department, she would have appeared and contested the Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Thu Jun 19 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Jun 19 21:43:44 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/2695/2024 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025 undefined proceedings before the Family Court.
8. In view of the aforesaid findings arrived at by this Court, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant deserves a chance to set out her defence before the Family Court and therefore, without entering into the merits of the proceedings, the Court deems it fit to remand the proceedings before the Family Court, Vadodara, which will undertake the proceedings afresh.
9. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned judgment and decree dated 22.08.2023 passed by the Family Court, Vadodara in Family Suit No.44 of 2020 is hereby quashed and set aside. Considering the time lapse, the Family Court, Vadodara is directed to deal with the Family Suit expeditiously. The Family Court to decide the Family Suit independently and without influenced by aby of the observations made hereinabove. The appeal stands allowed in the aforesaid terms.
10. In view of the order passed in the main appeal, Civil Applications do not survive. Disposed of accordingly.
(A.Y. KOGJE, J) (NSSG,J) SHITOLE Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by SHITOLE MANISH P.(HC00188) on Thu Jun 19 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Jun 19 21:43:44 IST 2025