IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1109 of 2007 HEMA DEVI Versus DINESH MANDAL ----------- 5. 26.8.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. If the facts, which have been stated in this application, are correct and the plea which has been advanced before this Court by Mr. Indeshwari Prasad Mandal, counsel for the petitioner, has any semblance of truth, the court below was definitely required to consider the same, had the petitioner in stead of moving this Court initially approached the court below which had dismissed the case of the petitioner due to default of only one day. As a matter of fact the petitioner ought to have moved the court below to show that even her absence on 30th June, 2006 was not deliberate and therefore, her matrimonial case ought to have been not dismissed. That having not been done, this Court would find it difficult to set aside the impugned order in absence of the husband opposite party. However, taking into account the aforementioned facts, this Court would 2 direct the court below to once again consider the whole issue in the light of a fresh application filed by the petitioner seeking restoration of the matrimonial case. Such prayer for restoration, however, will be considered only in presence of the husband of the petitioner and/or his counsel. With the aforementioned observation, this application is disposed of. ( Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/