- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE appeal has been filed by the appellant wife against the order dated 17.08.2012 whereby the application for setting aside the ex parte order dated 04.09.2009 has been dismissed as also against the judgment and decree dated 19.09.2009 whereby ex parte judgment and decree for divorce has been passed in favour of the respondent husband.
(3.) THE marriage between the parties was solemnised according to Hindu rites and ceremonies at Rohtak on 26.02.2006. The marriage was duly consumated. However, the parties had no issue from the marriage. The respondent husband on 08.04.2009 filed a petition seeking dissolution of the marriage between the parties in terms of Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ('Act' for short). It was alleged by him that the behaviour of the appellant from the date of marriage was very arrogant and she did not adjust herself in her matrimonial home. Besides, she did not show any respect or regard for the respondent and his family members. She taunted him and his family members saying that she had been thrown in the family of beggars and she had been pushed to hell. It is inter alia alleged by the respondent that the appellant on 08.12.2006 on the pretext of attending the marriage of her brother left her matrimonial home along with jewellery articles and Rs.25,000/ - in cash. The respondent on 10.12.2006 along with his parents and other persons went to the house of the appellant in the shape of a Panchayat so as to bring her back. However, the parents of the appellant informed that they would send the appellant back after a week but she did not turn up. It is alleged that again on 09.12.2006, 04.04.2008 and 04.02.2009, the respondent - husband along with some other respectables went to the house of the respondent to bring her back, however, she did not return with the appellant and flatly refused to join his company. Notice of the petition was sent to the appellant. However, according to the learned trial Court, despite due service of notice through publication, the appellant did not appear. She was accordingly proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 04.09.2009. The respondent produced ex parte evidence and his petition was allowed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sonepat vide judgment and decree dated 19.09.2009. The appellant - wife thereafter on 10.03.2010 filed a miscellaneous application for setting aside the ex parte order dated 04.09.2009 as also the ex parte judgment and decree dated 19.09.2009. It was stated by her that on the filing of the petition by the respondent, notice was ordered to be served on the appellant for 13.05.2009. However, notice was not served for that date and she was ordered to be summoned through registered cover for 06.06.2009; besides, 'dasti' summons were ordered to be issued, if desired, for 06.06.2009. However, service could not be effected and the registered cover was received back as unserved with the report that she had left the house where she was earlier residing. It is submitted that even though 'dasti' summons were ordered if desired, however, the respondent did not take 'dasti' summons for reasons best known. In any case, the learned Presiding Officer thereafter ordered summoning of the appellant by way of 'Munadi' (Proclamation) for 04.08.2009. The proclamation was not received back. However, the learned Additional District Judge, Sonepat passed an order for summoning the appellant by way of publication in the newspaper 'Hari Bhoomi' on furnishing publication charges within two days. The publication was duly effected for 04.09.2009. Since none appeared on behalf of the applicant - wife, she was proceeded against ex parte.;