Allowed

Bhavna Rajput v. Vipin

Delhi HC6 Feb 2019MAT.APP.(F.C.)/223/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal against a Family Court decree passed ex parte. The court set aside the divorce decree, directed the parties to appear for cross-examination and evidence filing, and referred the matter to the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 24.07.2018 is set aside. Parties to appear before the Family Court on 14.02.2019. Matter referred to Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre.

Bhavna Rajput Vs Vipin — Matrimonial and Divorce | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~17

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- MAT.APP.(F.C.) 223/2018

¶4

BHAVNA RAJPUT ..... Appellant

¶5

Through Ms. Gita Dhingra, Advocate

¶6

versus

¶7

VIPIN ..... Respondent Through Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan and Mr. S.K. Sharma, Advocates

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

¶10

O R D E R % 06.02.2019

¶11

Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 24.07.2018 by which a decree of divorce has been passed by the Family Court in the absence of the appellant wife.

¶12

Ms. Dhingra, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the respondent appeared in person on 17.11.2017 but his counsel was not available and the matter was adjourned to 21.03.2018. On 21.03.2018, the respondent appeared with his counsel but unfortunately the appellant could not appear and she was under the impression that the matter is listed for 22.03.2018. On 22.03.2018, when the appellant could not find her matter in the cause list, the appellant enquired from the Reader and she learnt that the matter was adjourned to 10.07.2018. Counsel submits that the counsel who was appearing in the matter did not ascertain the order and it is only on 10.07.2018, did the appellant learn that, in fact the appellant had been proceeded ex parte . Counsel submits that the appellant should not suffer for the inaction on the part of her counsel.

¶13

She further submits that the appellant is not aware about court procedure and belongs to the weaker section of society. She prays that one opportunity may be granted to cross-examine the respondent and one opportunity may also be granted to the appellant to lead her evidence.

¶14

Mr. Chauhan, learned counsel for the respondent has reluctantly, but very fairly agreed to the suggestion made by the counsel for the appellant provided that the appellant does not delay the matter any further.

¶15

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 24.07.2018 is set aside. The parties will appear before the Family Court on 14.02.2019. The Family Court will fix the matter for cross-examination of the respondent. Thereafter, one opportunity would be granted to the appellant to file her evidence by way of affidavit.

¶16

As suggested, the matter is also referred to the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre. Parties to appear before the Mediator on 11.02.2019 at 3:00 P.M. Parties agree to co-operate with the Mediator.

¶17

The appeal stands disposed of in above terms.

¶18

CMs.APPL 36035/2018 and 36037/2018 also stand disposed of in view of the order passed in the appeal.

¶19

G.S.SISTANI, J

¶20

JYOTI SINGH, J

¶21

FEBRUARY 06, 2019 pst/ MAT.APP.(F.C.) 223/2018

¶22

2/2

Bhavna Rajput v. Vipin

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhavna Rajput v. Vipin

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vikram Vij Vs Anju Vij @ Anju Ahuja

Bharti Vs Ramji Yadav

Madhur Parakh Vs Amit Mehta

Mala Singh Chawla Vs Rahul Chawla

Dhritiman Chakravorty Vs Betty Chakravorty

Sunil Sharma Vs Renu Sharma

Sanjay Rawat Vs Sunita Rawat

Garima Jaitly Vs Vipin Jaitly & Ors.

Mohammad Zafir Vs Tata Sons Ltd. & Ors.

Vikram Vij Vs Anju Vij @ Anju Ahuja

Gautam Gambhir Vs D a P & Co. and Anr.

Prashant Prakash Sahni Vs Devika Mehra

Anis Ahmed Vs New Delhi Municipal Council and Anr.

Pooja Sharma Bajaj Vs Kunal Bajaj