Smt Sri Vidya Dutt vs Sri Prakash Kalenjeri ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 3240 Kant

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                            PRESENT

           THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA

                             AND

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI

                 M.F.A.No.6713/2021 (FC)

BETWEEN :
SMT. SRI VIDYA DUTT
W/O SRI PRAKASH KALENJERI BALASUBRAMANIAN
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
R/AT FLAT NO.103, S.L.V. UNIWORTH CLASSIC
I STAGE, 4TH BLOCK, 9TH MAIN
H.B.R.LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560043          ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI B.K.SANJAY, ADV.)

AND :
SRI PRAKASH KALENJERI BALASUBRAMANIAN
S/O SRI BALASUBRAMANIAN
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT FLAT NO.201,
K.T.ABHIJITH APARTMENTS
NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL ROAD
V.V.PURAM, BENGALURU - 560004         ...RESPONDENT

(BY SRI H.N.SHASHIDHARA, SENIOR ADV. A/W
    SRI SUHAS H.S., ADV.)


     THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF FAMILY
COURTS ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.04.2021
PASSED IN M.C.NO.304/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II
ADDITIONAL PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU,
ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 13(1)(i-a) OF
THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT.
                            -2-

      THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
S. SUJATHA, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:



                     JUDGMENT

The appellant is assailing the legality and

correctness of the order dated 15.04.2021 passed in

M.C.No.304/2019 on the file of the II Additional

Principle Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, whereby the

petition filed by the respondent herein under Section

13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter

referred to as 'the Act' for short) has been allowed,

dissolving the marriage solemnised between the parties,

by a decree of divorce.

2. The marriage of the appellant with the

respondent was solemnised on 08.09.2005 at

Rajalakshmi Kalyana Mantapa, Jayanagar, Bengaluru

and they are blessed with a male child by name, Ayush

Kalanjeri. The petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Act

was filed by the respondent, making certain allegations

against the appellant in support of his petition to seek a

decree of divorce. It transpires that after issuance of

notice to the appellant, she had appeared through her

learned counsel and the matter was listed for filing of the

objections to the main petition. The Family Court

noticing that the sufficient opportunity provided for the

appellant to file an objections was not availed of,

proceeded to pass the impugned order after recording the

evidence of the respondent herein.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant

would contend that the said impugned order has been

passed by the Family Court during COVID-19 pandemic

situation when the standard operating procedure was in

operation. The intention of the appellant was to save

the marriage. In the background of the allegations made

against her she was totally disturbed and was not in a

position to respond to the same as the allegations were

baseless and far from truth. No sufficient opportunity

was provided to the appellant to file the statement of

objections, more particularly she was traumatized and

was under depression in view of the averments made in

the petition. Learned counsel further submits that the

appellant is indeed ready and willing to lead a happy

marital life with the respondent and, as such, seeks the

reversal of the decree passed by the Family Court.

     4.      Learned      counsel     appearing        for     the

respondent    justifying     the    impugned     order       would

contend that sufficient opportunity, though granted to

the appellant, no objections were filed. Hence, having

no other option, the Court proceeded to pass an ex parte

decree, which cannot be faulted with. However, having

regard to the ex parte decree passed during COVID-19

situation and the standard operating procedure

providing certain relaxations during that period, it is

fairly submitted that the respondent cannot object for

remanding the matter to the Family Court for

reconsideration.

5. In view of the aforesaid submissions made

by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and

perusing the material on record, it cannot be gainsaid

that the ex parte decree has been passed during COVID-

19 pandemic situation. In the light of the fervent plea

made by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant

for providing an opportunity to put forth her case, we

are of the considered view that the interest of justice

and equity would be met in setting aside the order

impugned and remanding the matter to the Family

Court for reconsideration in order to enable the

appellant to file her objections to the main matter and

to adduce her evidence.

6. For the reasons aforesaid, we set aside the

order dated 15.04.2021 passed in M.C.No.304/2019

impugned herein and restore the matter to the file of the

II Additional Principle Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru,

for reconsideration, keeping open all the rights and

contentions of the parties.

7. Since both the parties are represented by

their learned counsel, they are directed to appear before

the Family Court on 21.03.2022 without waiting for any

notice and shall take further orders. The appellant shall

file her statement of objections on that day i.e.

21.03.2022, after serving an advance copy on the other

side.

8. The Family Court shall provide an

opportunity of hearing to both the parties and shall

pass appropriate orders in accordance with law in, an

expedite manner.

Appeal stands allowed in terms of above.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE KTY