High CourtsSingle Bench(1990) 05 DEL CK 0020

Puneet Chander Bhasin vs Smt. Sunita

Delhi High Court · Decided on 3 May 1990 · Citation: AIR 1990 Delhi 320 : (1992) 2 DMC 485

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mahinder Narain, J
CASE NUMBER
C.M (M) . No. 148 of 1990

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 205 words
1.

The impugned order, in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, has been passed after hearing the counsel for the parents of the wife in a matrimonial matter.

2.

The only parties which can be heard in a matrimonial matter are the husband or the wife or the co-respondent. Matrimonial jurisdiction of Courts is a special jurisdiction, which is controlled by, in the instant case, the Hindu Marriage Act.

3.

The Court below has erred in entertaining any contention which is purported to have been raised by the parents of the respondent-wife.

4.

The application under Order 5, Rule 20 of the CPC is an innocuous application. It was for substituted service on the respondent. In the facts of the instant case, it should have been allowed without anything more.

5.

As the respondent has not been served in the ordinary way, it is fit and proper that service on the respondent be effected by publication.

6.

This petition is allowed, and disposed of with the observations made above. The petitioner should appear before the Court below on 22nd May, 1990, on which date orders regarding effecting of substituted service on the respondent-wife be passed by the court.

7.

Petition allowed.