R. K. MAHAJAN, J. This first appeal from order has been preferred by the plaintiff appellant against the order dated 17-9- 1991 passed by S. B. Balveer, IInd Additional District Judge, Bulandshahr dismissing the application of the appellant whereby he has applied for setting side the order dated 19-8-1991 passed in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 7 of 1991 Dr. Girish Nidhi Sharma v. Dr. Neeraj Sharma whereby the court has dismissed the appeal in default of the appellant with costs to respondent. 2. It appears that a divorce petition numbered as O. S. No. 733 of 1988, is pending between husband and wife in the court of Civil Judge, Bulandshahr. An application under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act was moved on behalf of the mother-respondent for the custody of her minor child, namely Tosh Nidhi, aged about 7 years at that time. 3. The learned Civil Judge, Bulandshahr has passed an order on 17-1-1991 to the effect that the custody of the child be given to the mother. Feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid order, the plaintiff has filed an appeal before the District Judge, Bulandshahr which was numbered as Civil Misc. Appeal No. 7, 1991. 4. The IInd Additional District Judge, Bulandshahr has dismissed the appeal in default on 11. 2. 1991 whereafter an restoration application was filed which too was dismissed. 5. I have heard Sri Ajit Kumar appearing for the appellant and Smt. Ramo Devi Gupta, Senior Advocate, appearing for the respondent. It is not disputed that the District Judge is enjoying the delegated powers for the appellate court purpose and both the counsel have not disputed this legal argument. This first appeal from order was filed against the order of the IInd Addl. District Judge. 6. Sri Ajit Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant, has argued that the appellant was suffering from dysentery and, therefore, he could not appear before the court. Smt. Ramo Devi Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent, has opposed the same. 7. Without going into the merits and demerits of the controversy, in the interest of justice, the IInd Additional District Judge, Bulandshahr is directed to decide the appeal within 15 days on merit from the date of production of a certified copy of this order by either party. Both the parties are directed to appear before the IInd Additional District Judge, Bulandshahr on 25-2-1997. Both the parties are directed to appear before the IInd Additional District Judge, Bulandshahr on 25-2-1997. The judgment shall be pronounced within two weeks thereafter. 8. The trial court should also decide the divorce petition within three months. The lower courts records be sent immediately. 9. Both the courts below would also try to concile the matter in their chambers with the counsel for the parties and the parties themselves. Both the courts below are directed that reasonable time be given to the mother for meeting the child in the chambers or any place fixed in order to satisfy the motherly love and affection. The courts can also direct the mother to meet the child on holidays besides chambers meeting. The court below should also try to reconcile the couple by making all the possible efforts. 10. In the result, the appeal succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The case remanded back to the court below to decide the appeal, as well as the suit itself, as directed above. 11. Copy of this order be given to the learned counsel for the parties on payment of usual charges within a week. Appeal allowed. .