DN Chowdhury, J. — The appeal is on behalf of the wife and directed against the judgment and decree dated 3.4.97, passed by the Family Court in case No.FC (Civil) 166 of 1995 thereby dissolving the marriage between the parties on a suit and proceeding for dissolution of marriage initiated at the instance of the husband-respondent. 2. The respondent in his application for termination of marriage averred that the marriage between the parties was performed on 7.3.1973 at Gobardanga, West Bengal as per Hindu rites, customs and ceremonies. Three daughters, namely Sutapa, Sujata and Sumitra were born out of the wedlock whose age were shown as 21 years, 20 years and 19 years respectively on the institution of the suit and proceeding before the Family Court on 19.12.95. The grounds for dissolution of marriage as cited at sub-paragraphs (a) to (s) of paragraph 2 mainly contains the allegation of negligence and harassment caused from the spouse causing hurt, agony and depression to the petitioner. 3. The appellant who was the respondent in the proceeding submitted her written statement challenging the territorial jurisdiction of the Family Court. The said plea was taken specifically at paragraph 7 of the written statement, which reads as follows: “7. Sir, I understand that, the suit under section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for decree of divorce can be filed only at the place where the marriage was performed-registered or the place where the family was last staying. Accordingly, “this case does not come under the jurisdiction of Honourable Family Court at Kamrup Guwahati-1, therefore request you to kindly transfer the case to Family Court, Bombay, where we have been for last 8 years.” 4. The respondent also denied the allegation as false, mischievous and misleading. In the written statement the wife also indicated about the penurious condition of the family disabling her to come all the way form Bombay and defend her case at Guwahati and expressed her willingness to attend the Court for which the fare is to be borne by the husband-applicant. The said written statement was received but the learned Principal Judge surprisingly put a cold shoulder to the contents of the written statement and remaining oblivious to matter, passed the following order on 10.4.96 : “1st party is present. 2nd party simply sent a WS and did not take any step further. The said written statement was received but the learned Principal Judge surprisingly put a cold shoulder to the contents of the written statement and remaining oblivious to matter, passed the following order on 10.4.96 : “1st party is present. 2nd party simply sent a WS and did not take any step further. The statement of 1 st party is recorded exparte. Prima facie the case is proved ex parte and the marriage between the parties is dissolved by a decree of divorce. Send a copy of this order to the 2nd party immediately. Draw up a decree accordingly.” However, at the instance of the second party by an order dated 18/19.1.97 the learned Principal Judge set aside the exparte decree and fixed 27.2.97 for written statement. Finally the exparte impugned order was passed on 3.4.97, which reads as follows : “3.4.97 : 1st party is present, 2nd party is absent. Perused petition No.214/ 97 dated 3.4.97 submitted by the petitioner. The statement of the petitioner is recorded exparte. The suit is decreed exparte and the marriage between the parties is dissolved. But the petitioner will pay permanent alimony @ Rs.50 thousand each to the respondent and three daughters. In total he will pay Rs.2 lacs. The petitioner will pay the alimony Rs.50,000 to the respondent and out of rest Rs. 1,50,000 the petitioner will fixed deposit Rs 30,000 each for three daughters in their names and the daughters will be able to encash when they become major and rest 20,000 each shall have to be given to the respondent in cash. In other words, the petitioner in total will pay cash amounting of Rs.50,000 to the respondent, Rs 20,000 each for the three daughter, ie Rs 1 lac 10 thousand in total to respondent. If he fail to comply with the above order within three months from the date of this order, the exparte order will be automatically vacated. Send the copy of the order to OP also. Also perused the petition submitted by the OP and the petition is rejected. Fix 4.7.97 for payment.” 5. Mr. G. Uzir, learned counsel for the appellant questioned the legitimacy of the proceeding including the impugned order as contrary to the provisions of the Family Courts Act, 1984, Hindu Marriage Act and the accepted norms of fair play injustice. 6. Mr. Also perused the petition submitted by the OP and the petition is rejected. Fix 4.7.97 for payment.” 5. Mr. G. Uzir, learned counsel for the appellant questioned the legitimacy of the proceeding including the impugned order as contrary to the provisions of the Family Courts Act, 1984, Hindu Marriage Act and the accepted norms of fair play injustice. 6. Mr. KN Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, however, submitted that the learned Family Court did substantial justice since the marriage according to the learned counsel had irretrievably broken down. Mr. Choudhury also pointed out that the appellant- wife was given opportunity to appear and defend her case and since she chose not to appear, the learned Family Court has rightly passed the impugned decree. Mr. Choudhury, the learned counsel also referred to the solemnisation of his marriage with Smti Munira Bagasrawalla on 2.8.96. 7. Parties before us are Hindu and is regulated by the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. A marriage can be dissolved by decree of divorce in any of the grounds enumerated in sub-section (1) of section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Under sub-section (1) (a) either party to a marriage may present petition for dissolution of marriage on the ground referred to is sub-section (1) to (1) (a). In addition, a wife may also prefer petition for dissolution of marriage and decree of divorce on the ground emumetated therein. Section 23 of the Act confers power on the Court to pass adecree if it is 'satisfied' that any of the grounds of the granting relief exists. It cast an obligation on the Court to satisfy about the existence of any of the ground for divorce on due application of mind. Section 23 further put an obligation for making a genuine endeavour for reconciliation. The material provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 23 of the Hindu Marriage Act is quoted below: “23. It cast an obligation on the Court to satisfy about the existence of any of the ground for divorce on due application of mind. Section 23 further put an obligation for making a genuine endeavour for reconciliation. The material provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 23 of the Hindu Marriage Act is quoted below: “23. (2) Before proceeding to grant any relief under this Act, it shall be the duty of the Court in the first instance, in every case where it is possible so to do consistently with the nature and circumstances of the case, to make every endeavour to bring about a reconciliation between the parties : Provided that nothing contained in sub-section shall apply to any proceeding wherein relief is sought on any of the grounds specified in clause (ii), clause (iii), clause (iv), clause (v), clause (vi) or clause (vii) of sub-section (1) of section 13. (3) For the purpose of aiding the Court in bringing about such reconciliation, the Court may, if the parties so desire or if the Court thinks it just and proper so to do, adjourn the proceedings for a reasonable period not exceeding fifteen days and refer the matter to any person named by the parties in this behalf or to any persons nominated by the Court if the parties fail to name any person, with directions to report to the Court as to whether reconciliation can be and has been effected and the Court shall in disposing of the proceeding have due regard to the report.” 8. The Family Courts under, the Family Courts Act, 1984 are created with the view to promote conciliation in securing speedy settlement of disputes relating to marriage and other matters Connected thereof. Appointment of Judges of Family Courts are made under sub-section (4) of section 4 of the Family Courts Act by the State Govt with the concurrence of the High Court. Appointment of Judges of Family Courts are made under sub-section (4) of section 4 of the Family Courts Act by the State Govt with the concurrence of the High Court. Sub-section (4) of section 4 enjoins considerations ie required to be taken in selecting persons for appointment e of Judge, which reads as follows : “(4) In selecting persons for appointment as Judges - (a) every endeavour shall be made to ensure that persons committed to the need to protect and preserve the institution of marriage and to promote the welfare of children and qualified by reason of their experience and expertise to promote the settlement of disputes by conciliation and counselling, are selected, and (b) preference shall be given to women.” 9. Section 9 further entrusted the Family Court to make an effort to settle disputes under section 9 of the Act. A marriage is not a mere civil contract and a proceeding for dissolution of marriage cannot be equated with a mercantile litigation. In this case we have already extracted the full judgment of the Family Court wherein Family Court has dealt with the matter in a most casual fashion overlooking its responsibility entrusted by the statute. The Principal Judge, Family Court is entrusted with the responsibility for conducting the Family Court and to decide the case in conformity with the law and adjudicate the dispute raised therein and as such a Court does not act like an Arbitrator. Section 17 enshrines upon the Family Courts, to pass judgment containing concised statement of fact before determining or arriving at a decision thereon and reasons for such decision. A decision without reason cannot be claimed to be a judgment. A true judicial decision must adjudicate the dispute between the parties by giving reasons therefor. Section 17 enshrines upon the Family Courts, to pass judgment containing concised statement of fact before determining or arriving at a decision thereon and reasons for such decision. A decision without reason cannot be claimed to be a judgment. A true judicial decision must adjudicate the dispute between the parties by giving reasons therefor. In Cooper vs. Wilson, 1937 -2 309 (F) at page 340, the nature of judicial decision are discussed in the following words : “A true judicial decision presupposes an existing dispute between two or more parties and then involve four requisites : (1) The presentations (not necessarily orally) of their case by the parties to the dispute; (2) if the dispute between them is a question of fact the ascertain of the fact by means of evidence adduced by the parties to the dispute of often with the assistance of argument by or on behalf of the parties on the evidence; (3) if the dispute between them is a question of law, the submission of legal arguments by the parties; and (4) a dec ision which disposesof the whole matter by a finding upon the facts in dispute and an application of the law of the land to the facts so found including where required a ruling upon any disputed question of law.” The said principle was approved by the Supreme Court in Makbool Hussain vs. State of Bombay, AIR 1953 SC 325 and Branjanandan Sinha vs. Jyoti Narayan, AIR 1956 SC 66 . 10. We have gone through the evidence on record and found that the learned Judge seemingly overlooked the evidence on record. The learned Judge not only failed to obey the mandate of the statute, but also failed to adjudicate the dispute as per law. 11. Mere absence of the defendant does not entitle a decree in favour of the plaintiff. Even for an exparte decree the Court cannot eschew the essence of prima facie case in favour of a decree for the plaintiff. Absence of the defendant does not make the coast clear for awarding a decree in favour of the plaintiff. When a decree is passed, notwithstanding the requisites mentioned, the defendant can legitimately claim for setting aside suchjudgment ex-debitojustitiae. 'Discretio est discrenere per legem quid sitjustum\ Discretion means what is just in law. 12. Absence of the defendant does not make the coast clear for awarding a decree in favour of the plaintiff. When a decree is passed, notwithstanding the requisites mentioned, the defendant can legitimately claim for setting aside suchjudgment ex-debitojustitiae. 'Discretio est discrenere per legem quid sitjustum\ Discretion means what is just in law. 12. For the reasons stated above, the impugned judgment and decree cannot be sustained and accordingly the same is set aside. The case is remitted to the Family Court for disposal in accordance with law. 13. The petition is allowed with cost of Rs.5,000. 14 After pronouncement of the judgment, Mr. Uzir, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that since the appellant with her three college going daughters is residing at Bombay, for that matter she is not in a position to attend the Court and prayed for a direction to allow her representation by a local legal practitioner of her choice engaged as Amicus Curiae. Learned counsel further submitted that the appellant is facing financial crisi s and as such a direction for release of financial support be granted during the pendency of the case for overcoming the situation. 15. We are not passing any direction from our end since we are remanding the matter to the learned Special Judge, Family Court for disposal of the case as per law. It would be open for the appellant to make proper application before the learned Family Court in this regard which shall give due consideration to the desire of the appellant as per law. Mr. Uzir referred to section 13 of the Act and pointed out about the restriction of right to legal representation. We donot read complete prohibition of representation by legal practitioner. The right ofrepresentation to be judged on the fact situation for doing complete justice between the parties.