HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA MAT APP. NO.21 OF 2024 Smt. Rekha Chakraborty …… Appellant(s) Versus Sri Vikram Kumar .......Respondent(s) For the Appellant(s) : Ms. Aradhita Debbarma. For the Respondent(s) : None. Date of hearing and delivery of Judgment & Order : 05/03/2025 Whether fit for reporting : YES/NO. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT J U D G M E N T & O R D E R(ORAL) (T. AMARNATH GOUD,J) This present appeal has been filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, read with Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, against the Judgment and Decree dated 02.04.2024, passed by the learned Additional Judge, Family Court, West Tripura District, in Case No. T.S. (Div) 442 of 2022. 2. The brief facts of this case are that the appellant filed an application for dissolving the marriage between the appellant and the respondent, which was solemnized on 10.12.2017. The learned Additional Judge, Family Court, Agartala, West Tripura, in the impugned case, passed an ex-parte Judgment and Decree dated 02.04.2024 and declined to grant divorce. Hence, against the ex-parte judgment and decree dated 02.04.2024, the appellant has preferred this instant appeal for the dissolution of the marriage between the appellant and the respondent. 3. Heard Ms. A. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. No representation was made on behalf of the respondent despite service of notice through paper publication. 4. Ms. Debbarma, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the learned Court below failed to consider that the appellant and the respondent have been living separately for a long time and have had no contact. Even after service of notice via paper publication, the respondent did not appear. The marriage between the parties is, for all practical purposes, dead, as it is a soulless one. 5. Heard and perused the record. 6. This Court is satisfied with the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant. Furthermore, since there has been no contact between the appellant and the respondent, and they have been living separately for a long time, the marriage is irretrievably broken. As such, this present appeal is allowed, and the divorce is granted. The impugned order of the Court below is set aside. 7. As a sequel, any stay, if existing, stands vacated. Pending application(s), if any, also stand closed. B. PALIT, J T. AMARNATH GOUD, J suhanjit RAJKUMAR SUHANJIT SINGHA Digitally signed by RAJKUMAR SUHANJIT SINGHA Date: 2025.03.10 15:57:20 +05'30'