Gujarat High Court
Megha W/O. Anand Ramanbhai Chauhan And ... vs Chauhan Anand Ramanbhai on 2 December, 2025
Author: Sangeeta K. Vishen
Bench: Sangeeta K. Vishen
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1673/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/12/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1673 of 2024
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1673 of 2024
==========================================================
MEGHA W/O. ANAND RAMANBHAI CHAUHAN AND D/O VASANT AAHIRE
Versus
CHAUHAN ANAND RAMANBHAI
==========================================================
Appearance:
HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS NILAM N CHAUHAN(6635) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS BHAKTI M JOSHI(3820) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 02/12/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN)
1. Captioned appeal is directed against the judgment dated 05.01.2023 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court whereby, Family Suit no.737 of 2021 is allowed and the marriage solemnized between the parties on 02.06.2015 has been dissolved. Further direction is issued to pay a permanent alimony as per the provisions of Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1955").
2. Being aggrieved, the appellant has preferred the captioned appeal on the ground that the judgment passed, is ex parte without offering sufficient opportunity to the appellant.
3. Ms Nilam N. Chauhan, learned advocate appearing for the appellant, submitted that it is sought to be recorded in the order that the summons is served upon the appellant; however, the appellant all throughout, was unaware about the summonses and Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by RAVI PRAVINCHANDRA PATEL(HC01068) on Thu Dec 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 04 21:13:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1673/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/12/2025 undefined the consequences thereof. Moreover, the appellant is not well versed with the nuances of the law so also the consequences of the non-observance of the procedure. It is submitted that though it is projected that the summonses have been served; however, it might have been received by the family members but not by the appellant and simply placing the acknowledgment receipt, would not be sufficent to substantiate that the summonses were served.
3.1 It is next argued that the assurance was extended by the respondent to the appellant that nothing would happen and everything, would be taken care of at his end. With a lack of understanding on her part, the appellant could not remain present. Language barrier is another reason and hence, the appellant could not appreciate the nature of the proceedings, the consequences and repercussions.
3.2 It is urged that the judgment being ex parte, deserves to be quashed and set aside.
4. Ms Bhakti M. Joshi, learned advocate appearing for the respondent, has raised an objection as to the maintainability of the captioned appeal in view of the provisions of Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") which provides a remedy to the appellant to approach the very Court for setting aside the ex parte decree if the appellant wishes so. It is urged that in view of the provisions of Order IX Rule 13 of the Code, the appeal, may not be entertained and the appellant may be relegated to approach the Court below.
5. Ms Nilam N. Chauhan, learned advocate, in the brief response, submitted that concurrent remedy is available to the party against whom ex parte decree is passed; namely, (i) preferring an appeal Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by RAVI PRAVINCHANDRA PATEL(HC01068) on Thu Dec 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 04 21:13:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1673/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/12/2025 undefined under Section 96 of the Code or (ii) filing an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code. It is submitted that there being concurrent remedy available, the appellant has chosen to approach this Court. Arguing thus, it is fairly submitted that the appellant, may not press the captioned appeal with a liberty to file an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code; however, filing of the appeal may not come in her way and the withdrawal may be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the appellant. Moreover, the issue of delay may also crop up as the judgment is of the month of January 2023. As the appellant was pursuing the remedy under a bona fide impression, the time consumed may be considered as per the provisions of Section 14 of the Limiation Act, 1963.
6. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties. Perused and considered the documents made available on record.
7. The provisions of Order IX Rule 13 of the Code provides a remedy to a party for setting aside an ex parte decree. In the case on hand, the judgment has been passed and according to the appellant it is ex parte. Acceding to the request of Ms Nilam N. Chauhan, learned advocate for the appellant, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the appellant, the appeal is permitted to be withdrawn with a liberty to the appellant to approach the Family Court in terms of the provisions of Order IX Rule 13 of the Code.
8. The delay application, if any, is filed, the same may be considered favorably as the appellant, has been pursuing the remedy before this Court with a minimum delay of 68 days.
9. In view of the above, the appeal stands disposed of as Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by RAVI PRAVINCHANDRA PATEL(HC01068) on Thu Dec 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 04 21:13:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/FA/1673/2024 ORDER DATED: 02/12/2025 undefined withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. No order as to costs.
10. Needless to clarify that this Court, has not entered into the merits of the case and the Court below, shall decide the application that may be filed, independently and strictly in accordance with law.
11. In view of the disposal of the captioned first appeal, civil application for stay would not survive and is accordingly disposed of.
(SANGEETA K. VISHEN,J) (NISHA M. THAKORE,J) RAVI P. PATEL Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by RAVI PRAVINCHANDRA PATEL(HC01068) on Thu Dec 04 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 04 21:13:40 IST 2025