JUDGMENT : 1. Though this appeal is listed for admission and to consider the interim applications, with the consent of learned counsel on both sides, it is heard finally. 2. The appellant is the wife, while the respondent is husband. Respondent had filed M.C.No.4010/2017 before the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as”the Act” for the sake of brevity) seeking dissolution of his marriage with the appellant/wife by a decree of divorce. By the impugned judgment and decree dated 07/12/2018, the Family Court has decreed the petition and dissolved the marriage by grant of a decree of divorce. At this stage itself, it may be mentioned that the appellant/wife did not participate in the said proceeding. Hence, being aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the Family Court, this appeal has been preferred. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record. 4. Appellant’s counsel contended that although the appellant was served in M.C.No.4010/2017 by the Family Court at Bengaluru, she did not file any statement of objections to the petition nor did she crossexamine the respondent who tendered his evidence as PW.1 and neither could she letin her evidence in the matter. In the circumstances, the impugned judgment and decree is virtually an exparteone without a contest and without hearing the appellant herein. He submitted that the appellant is aggrieved by the impugned judgment and decree of divorce being granted to the respondent in the absence of her contest. Learned counsel for the appellant has also submitted that there was no intention on the part of the appellant to delay the proceeding, but she was unaware of the exact date on which she had to appear subsequent to her appearing before the Family Court and seeking permission to engage the services of an advocate. Hence, the impugned judgment and decree may be set aside and the matter may be remanded to the Family Court so as to give an opportunity to the appellant to file her statement of objections to M.C.No.4010/2017 and to participate in the proceeding. 5. Percontra, learned counsel for the respondent supported the impugned judgment and decree and contended that the appellant is guilty of dilatory tactics. 5. Percontra, learned counsel for the respondent supported the impugned judgment and decree and contended that the appellant is guilty of dilatory tactics. That she was served by the Family Court in M.C.No.4010/2017, she appeared before the Family Court, but for the reasons best known to her, she did not file any objection nor contest the matter. In the circumstances, the Family Court had no option, but to record the evidence of respondent, raised the points for consideration and answered the same in favour of respondent. He submitted that there is no merit in the appeal and hence, the appeal may be dismissed. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties, the following points would arise for our consideration: (i) Whether the impugned judgment and decree 7. The fact that the respondent had filed M.C.No.4010/2017 before the Family Court, which has been allowed without the participation of appellant in the said proceeding is not in dispute. The only controversy is, dated 07/12/2018 made in M.C.No.4010/2017 would call for any interference in this appeal? (ii) What order? whether the appellant who did not participate in the said proceeding ought to be given an opportunity to contest the said petition so that the Family Court could reconsider the matter and dispose of M.C.No.4010/2017 after giving an opportunity to the appellant herein to contest the matter. It is noted that the appellant was served in the said case, but she did not file any statement of objections nor did she crossexamine the respondent, who tendered evidence as PW.1 and neither did she letin any evidence in the matter. She was also not heard in the matter. No doubt, the Family Court has proceeded to dispose of the case in the absence of the appellant herein, but the pertinent point to know is whether the Family Court would have arrived at the impugned findings and judgment and decree had the appellant herein contested the matter. Since the appellant did not contest the matter and is aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the Family Court, which is a serious nature, we find that the interest of justice would be subserved if an opportunity is given to the appellant to contest M.C.No.4010/2017 filed by the respondent herein, who has sought for a decree of divorce. In the circumstances, the impugned judgment and decree is set aside. In the circumstances, the impugned judgment and decree is set aside. Since the matter is remanded to the concerned Family Court by restoring M.C.No.4010/2017, on the file of the said Court and the parties are represented by their respective counsel, they are directed to appear before the said Court on 08/04/2020without expecting any separate notices from the said Court. On the said date or any other date stipulated by the Family Court, the appellant shall file her statement of objections to M.C.No.4010/2017. If any such statement of objections is filed by the appellant herein, the Family Court shall dispose of the case in accordance with law. The appeal is allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms. In view of disposal of the appeal, the pending applications stand disposed. The appellant is at liberty to seek interim maintenance or alimony as the case may be before the Family Court or before any other forum.