JUDGMENT : K. HARILAL, J. 1. The appellant herein is the petitioner in OP (HMA) No. 335 of 2014 of the Family Court, Alappuzha. This appeal has been filed challenging the order dismissing the aforesaid Original Petition on default. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent. 3. The preliminary question that arises for consideration is, whether an appeal would lie against an order dismissing the suit on default. 4. According to Section 96 of the CPC, save where otherwise expressly provided in the body of the Code or by any law for the time being in force, an appeal shall lie from every decree passed by any court exercising original jurisdiction to the Court authorised to hear appeals from the decisions of such court. As per Section (2)(2)(b) of the CPC, decree shall not include any order of dismissal for default. When an order of dismissal for default is not a decree, it follows that there cannot be an appeal against an order of dismissal for default. The above view gets clarification from Order XLIII (1)(c) of the CPC. According to this Rule, an appeal shall lie from an order under Rule 9 of Order IX rejecting an application (in a case open to appeal) for an order to set aside the dismissal of a suit. It is needless to say that the proper remedy to challenge an order dismissing the suit for default is an application under Order IX Rule 9 of the CPC, to set aside the dismissal for default, before the court, which dismissed the suit, for default, itself. Thus, on a combined reading of the aforesaid provisions, we conclude that an appeal shall not lie against an order dismissing the suit for default. 5. Hence, this appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.