Court Dismisses Wife's Appeal Against Ex-Parte Divorce Decree. Appeal Rendered Infructuous Due to Husband's Lawful Remarriage Following Divorce Decree

Case Note & Summary

A second appeal filed by the appellant/wife against the decision of the learned District Judge-10, Aurangabad, who refused to condone a 166-day delay in challenging a divorce decree. The appellant argued that the delay was due to her advocate not informing her about the decree in time. The respondent/husband remarried after the decree, and the court ultimately held that the remarriage rendered the appeal infructuous, affirming the lower court's decision.

1. Introduction Consent of Counsel: Case heard finally at admission stage by consent of counsel for both parties. Nature of Appeal: Second appeal by appellant/wife against District Judge-10, Aurangabad's order denying delay condonation. 2. Background Facts Marriage and Dispute: Appellant and respondent married on 02/04/2013, one daughter from wedlock, dispute led to Hindu Marriage Petition No. 3 of 2016 by respondent for divorce. Trial Court Decree: Divorce decree passed ex-parte on 29/08/2019 by the 12th Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division), Aurangabad. First Appeal and Delay: Appellant's application for condonation of 166-day delay rejected on 15/09/2021 by the first appellate court. 3. Appellant's Arguments Error in Judgment: First appellate court erred by not condoning the delay. Advocate's Negligence: Delay due to advocate not informing appellant about the decree. Principle of Natural Justice: Denial of condonation violated natural justice as the decree was ex-parte. 4. Respondent's Arguments Support for Lower Court's Decision: Supported impugned judgment and decree of divorce. Remarriage: Respondent remarried on 01/10/2019, now has a son. Infructuous Appeal: Citing remarriage, argued appeal was infructuous. 5. Court's Observations Appellant's Awareness: Appellant was aware of respondent's remarriage during delay condonation proceedings. First Appellate Court's Reasoning: Refusal based on appellant's status as a responsible government officer and negligence in prosecuting the divorce petition. 6. Legal Precedents and Analysis Section 15 of Hindu Marriage Act: Allows remarriage after a divorce decree unless an appeal is filed within the limitation period. Delhi High Court's Judgment in Seema Devi vs. Shree Ranjit Kumar Bhagat: Ex-parte decree of divorce holds the same effect as a contested one; remarriage lawful if no appeal within limitation. Supreme Court's Observations: Marriages contracted during prescribed periods are not void unless expressly stated by law. 7. Conclusion Substantial Question of Law: Whether the appeal became infructuous due to the remarriage of the husband. Answer: Affirmative. The appeal is dismissed as it became infructuous due to the respondent's lawful remarriage.