Madras High Court today refused to entertain a Civil Revision Petition filed for praying to set aside a February 2, 2014 ex-parte degcree of a subodinate judge against one A Raja Sundari in a matrimonial case and also dismissed the condone delay application filed by her.
After referring to several Supreme Court and High Courts judgements, Justice S Vimala said "unfortunately the revision petitioner has landed herself in such a position on account of her own conduct of negligence."
Dismissing the petition, the judge said "it is evident that at every stage, the revision petitioner has exhibited indifference. When there is a duty to act with expedition at all stages, and if the petitioner is guilty of inordinate and unwarranted delay coupled with failure to observe the time frame, then the liability to suffer the consequences of dismissal, for want of prosecution, is inevitable."
Also Read
The matter relates to a matrimonial dispute between one Raja Sundari of Tanjore and Suresh Kumar of Chennai.
The marriage was held on March 28, 2007 and the petitioner gave birth to boy on January 4, 2008.
The husband filed a petition for divorce to Subordinate Judge, Tambaram, on August 4, 2008 and the subordinate judge on February 11, 2010 passed an ex-parte order against the wife.
The condone delay petitions were also dismissed by the Judge.
On July 11, 2014, Suresh Kumar got second marriage against which Raja Sundari filed a Civil Revision petition seeking to set-aside the orders passed by the subordinate Judge, in the Madras High Court.
Justice S Vimala while considering the ex-parte decree passed by the Subordinate Judge in her order after referring to the amendment made to Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which states that when a marriage has been dissolved by a decree of divorce and either there is no right of appeal against the decree, or if there is such a right of appeal, the time for appealing has expired without an appeal having been presented or an appeal has been presented but has been dismissed, it shall be lawful for either party to the marriage to marry again.
"By virtue of the remarriage, now the interest of second wife has intervened and the court is expected to take cognizance of subsequent event also in deciding the application for restoration/setting aside ex-parte decree, provided fairness to both side" and dismissed the Civil Revision Petition.
