1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD 41. WP/8595/2009 (RICHA V/S VIVEK ) -------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Mr. J.R.Shah, Adv., for the petitioner. Mr.N.G.Shah, Adv., for sole respondent. ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE:15/10/2010 ... 1. Heard both the learned Counsel. In an egoistic feud between the spouses have led to matrimonial proceedings and several other prosecutions. The fact remains, due to non appearance of the wife/the petitioner, in time, she faced brunt of getting decree in HMP No.A. 61/2008. The record illustrates that the wife was, indeed, served with the summons in the said proceedings but she did not entertain it and attend the proceedings. The accusation hurled by the wife/petitioner was, the counselling in the matter also could not serve any purpose. 2. The learned Judge,basically, dismissed the application for restoration, there being delay of 33 2 days caused in filing the application seeking restoration. The delay of 33 days was sufficiently demonstrated and explained there was obviously no reason for the petitioner (wife) to drag the ongoing matrimonial proceedings. 3. Consequently, delay of 33 days in causing to make the application is condoned and also the restoration application moved by the wife is allowed. The learned Judge seized with the matter ( HMP A.61/2008) shall ensure to complete the same within a specific time frame. The ex parte decree is set aside. Both the parties to appear before the learned Judge on 29th Oct.,2010. No costs. Petition allowed to the extent indicated above. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE ... AGP/8595-09wp