Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 389 (HP)

RAJIV SHARMA v. SMRITI SHARMA

2013-05-06

V.K.SHARMA

body2013
JUDGMENT V.K.SHARMA, J. 1. IN view of the nature of the order proposed to be passed in this matter, issuance of notice to the respondent is dispensed with. 2. THE petitioner-husband is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 28.12.2012, whereby his right to file reply to the petition filed against him by the respondent-wife for grant of divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 has been closed. The order under challenge is reproduced below for ready reference. "28.12.2012:- Pr: Shri Sanuay Thakur Adv csl for petitioner. Sh. Yugal Sharma Adv csl for respdt. Case taken up today as I was on leave on 12.12.12. Reply not filed. More time prayed. So many opportunities have already been granted to the respondent to file reply. Even one last opportunity was granted on 5.11.2012 since the respondent had stated that his mother was suffering from cancer. Even today reply not filed. Hence defence of respondent is closed. For exparte evidence to come up on 6.3.2013. Sd/- (Baldev Singh), District Judge, Kullu." In President, Shastra Society for Health and Social Transformation, Rehabilitation Vs. Smt. Kimtu Devi W/o Roop Singh Kapoor, AIR 2013 Himachal Pradesh 32, this court has held that in order to advance interests of justice, it is always desirable that any lis is heard and disposed of on merits without laying undue stress on procedural formalities, unless party seeking indulgence of court is otherwise disentitled for exercise of judicial discretion in this regard due to his/her act and conduct. It was further held that in case of grant of any further opportunity to a party to file pleadings/lead evidence, comparative hardship and prejudice, if any, apprehended by the other side, can very well be taken care of by putting terms as to payment of costs. 3. IN view of the above, it shall be expedient and in the interest o justice to grant the petitioner-husband another opportunity to file reply to the divorce petition, as last chance. Ordered accordingly. Consequently, the impugned order dated 28.12.2012 is set aside with a direction to the learned trial court to afford one more opportunity to the petitioner-husband to file reply to the divorce petition filed against him by the respondent-wife, which is pending trial in the said court, as last chance. However, it shall be subject to payment of costs of Rs. Consequently, the impugned order dated 28.12.2012 is set aside with a direction to the learned trial court to afford one more opportunity to the petitioner-husband to file reply to the divorce petition filed against him by the respondent-wife, which is pending trial in the said court, as last chance. However, it shall be subject to payment of costs of Rs. 2000/- which shall be tendered in the learned trial court on the day fixed for filing reply. The amount of costs shall go to the respondent-wife. 4. THE petitioner-husband through learned counsel is directed to appear before the learned trial court on 28.5.2013. The learned trial court shall issue notice to the respondent-wife for the date to be fixed in the matter. Let a copy of this order/judgment be sent forthwith to the learned trial court for information and compliance. In view of disposal of the petition, pending CMP No. 510 of 2013 shall also stand disposed of.