Full Text
MAT. APP (F.C.) 36/2016
DR. SMT. ESIDIRA YOG Appellant Represented by: None.
DR. SMT. INDIRA YOG Appellant Represented by: None.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA
22.11.2016
ORDER
1. Filed before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, the appeals were transferred to this court by the Supreme Court vide order dated August 04, 2015 passed in Transfer Petitions (Civil) Nos.449-450/2014.
2. The parties took no steps by filing an application in this court for listing of the two appeals upon they being transferred to this court by the MatA.(F.C.) No.36/2016 & conn.matter Page 1 of[3] 2016:DHC:8842-DB Supreme Court and the registry of this court on its own listed the two appeals before the roster bench on March 21, 2016. Accordingly, court notices were issued to both the parties on March 21, 2016 returnable for May 02, 2016.
3. On May 02, 2016, Mr.Simarpal Singh Sawhney, Advocate entered appearance on behalf of the respondent but the court notice issued to the appellant was returned unserved without any report; and this is surprising.
4. Be that as it may, on May 02, 2016 court notice was once again directed to be served upon the appellant. The next date fixed was July 22,
2016. Mr.L.K.Garg, Advocate appeared for the appellant on July 22, 2016 and Mr.Simarpal Singh Sawhney, Advocate appeared for the respondent.
5. At joint request of both the counsel the matter was listed on September 28, 2016, when the two appeals were admitted.
6. Shown in the list of Final Hearing matters at Sl.No.15 and 16, effective serial number being 3 and 4, the two appeals have reached for hearing today.
7. None appears for the appellant. We note that two appeals have been filed inasmuch as by a common judgment and decree the respondent's petition seeking annulment ofthe marriage by grant of decree for divorce on ground of cruelty and desertion has been allowed. The petition filed by the appellant under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking restitution has been dismissed.
8. The couple are past their prime. The appellant would be aged about 70 years as of today and the respondent is aged around 73 years. Three children were bom during the wedlock. All ofwhom are well settled. Mat.A.(F.C.) No.36/2016 & conn.matter Page 2 of[3]
9. Be that as it may, sincenone appears for the appellant at the hearing ofthe two appeals, the two appeals are dismissed for non-prosecution.
10. No costs.
NOVEMBER 22,2016 ssc Mat.A.(F.C.) No.36/2016 & conn.matter PRADEEP NA RAJOG, J —Ola YOGESH KHANNA, J. Page 3 of[3]