Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:142748-DB Court No. - 39 Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 382 of 2024 Appellant :- Sumit Alias Gotiram Respondent :- Smt Rashmi Counsel for Appellant :- Harsh Tripathi,Sanjeeda,Vivek Singh Hon'ble Arindam Sinha,J. Hon'ble Avnish Saxena,J. 1. Mr Sharad Chand Rai, learned advocate, holding the brief appears on behalf of appellant and presses for hearing of his client's appeal. Respondent goes unrepresented. In this connection, three paragraphs of earlier order dated 31st July, 2025 are reproduced below. “There is endorsement in the order sheet saying that the postal article was returned unserved on addressee not found. We have ascertained that address given in the returned postal article corresponds to address of respondent appearing in impugned judgment. Furthermore, respondent also did not appear before the Family Court. We are satisfied the situation is of good service following judgments of the Supreme Court in C.C. Alavi Haji v. Palapetty Muhammed reported in (2007) 6 SCC 555, State of M.P. v. Hiralal, reported in (1996) 7 SCC 523 and M/s. Madan and Co. v. Wazir Jaivir Chand, reported in AIR 1989 SC 630. Registry to provide English translation of impugned judgment and place in the file. List on 20th August, 2025 marked at 2.00 p.m. ” 2. Registry has provided English translation of impugned judgement dated 19th March, 2024 of the Family Court, dismissing appellant's petition for dissolution of the marriage on ground of desertion. The judgement was made ex-parte against the wife, who, as aforesaid, also goes unrepresented at hearing of this appeal. 3. Reproduced below is the paragraph from impugned judgement carrying the ground of dismissal of the petition. "In support of his statement, the petitioner has filed his own affidavit 15A as evidence. The petitioner has prayed for a decree of divorce on the ground that the opposite party has abandoned him. In his petition, the petitioner has mentioned that when he went to bring back the respondent for the last time on 10th March, 2020 with his brother-in-law and Shivam, the respondent flatly refused to live with him. The plaintiff has not mentioned in his plaint that he had tried to bring back the respondent through relatives and society and made legal efforts to bring back her; rather, he has directly filed a case for dissolution of marriage. The plaintiff himself has submitted document no. 14C2, which is a true copy of the judgment passed in suit no. 356/2020 Smt. Rashmi vs Sumit under Section 125 CrPC. The said suit has been decided by the Family Court, Jalaun at Orai on the basis of merits, wherein it has been determined that the respondent is living at her father's house being aggrieved of the physical and mental harassment by her in-laws. Thus, the plaintiff has failed to prove his case even as ex parte. Hence, the suit is liable to be dismissed." 4. On query Mr. Sharad Chand Rai, submits, his client contested the maintenance proceeding, but did not challenge order dated 20th July, 2022 made in it. In paragraph-18 of said order the Family Court said, appellant had ousted respondent from her matrimonial home. This is a finding subsequently relied upon by the Family Court in dealing with appellant's petition for dissolution of the marriage. We find no error committed by said Court. 5. Impugned order is confirmed. The appeal is disposed of. Order Date :- 20.8.2025/MN/- (Arindam Sinha,J.) (Avnish Saxena,J.) Digitally signed by :- MAHENDRA NATH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad