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.
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
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
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
