A.O. No. 119 of 2008 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. Heard Mr. Ramji Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. This appeal, U/S 28 of Hindu Marriage Act read with Section 19 of Family Court Act, has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 20-3- 2008, passed by District Judge, Tehri Garhwal in Misc. Case No. 21 of 2007. Perusal of impugned judgment and award reveals that the learned District Judge has allowed the application of the respondent for setting aside the exparte judgment dated 24-8-2006 passed in O.S. No. 45/2005, filed by the petitioner U/S 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, and the suit was restored to its original number. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the application was filed with a long delay and the learned District Judge did not appreciate this fact and passed the impugned judgment. Perusal of the impugned judgment reveals that the learned District Judge has recorded a categorical finding that undisputedly respondent was arrested in a case U/S 307 IPC and was granted bail on 12.10.2007 and thereafter when she made inspection of file, she came to know about the exparte order, therefore, the restoration application was treated within time from the date of knowledge of the exparte judgment. Here it may also be noted that after restoration of the original suit full facts of the case will come before the trial court and the matter shall be finally decided after hearing both the parties. I do not find any illegality in the impugned judgment and order. The petition lacks merit and is dismissed in limine. (B.C. K., J.) Dated: 24-6-2008 ISB