IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.957 of 2007 SMT.REKHA DEVI Versus SANJEET KUMAR ----------- 2. 31.7.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the O.P. Counsel for the petitioner by raising various pleas on account of which the petitioner could not appear and contest the matrimonial case filed by her husband has tried to impress this Court that in the ends of justice she would at least be given one opportunity to contest the case. Mr. Sanjeev Ranjan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the husband, vehemently opposed the aforementioned submission of the counsel for the petitioner and says that this was a deliberate act on the part of the petitioner to delay the disposal of the matrimonial case and now at the fag end of the case. He has further submitted that in case this Court allows such prayer the petitioner should be awarded exemplary cost. Having given anxious consideration to the aforementioned submissions, this court is of the view that it is true that 2 there was some negligence on the part of the wife petitioner in contesting the matter, but then she being the weaker party has to be given a chance to contest the matter. Thus even if in the part she has not been diligent in pursuing her case, the interest of justice would require that she should be allowed to contest the matter which not only concerns her matrimonial life but in fact would be detrimental for rest of her whole life, inasmuch as if the suit is allowed without contest and the prayer of divorce of the husband is granted, she will have to find out her ways and means to live her independent life without any support from the husband. Considering all these aspects, this Court would set aside the impugned order and direct the court below to allow the petitioner to file her written statement within a period of six weeks of the receipt/ production of a copy of this order. Thereafter whatever evidence has been adduced by the O.P. husband behind the back of the petitioner would be made available for cross-examination and such cross- 3 examination must be completed within a period of three months from the aforesaid date of filing of the written statement. Thereafter the petitioner must lead her evidence and complete the same within a period of next six months. The argument thereafter must be completed by both the sides so that the divorce suit itself could be disposed of within a period of one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this time for any reason whatsoever the wife petitioner does not co-operate in the disposal of the divorce case filed by the husband opposite party, she will not be given any indulgence by the court below, which if the situation so requires would proceed to dispose of the divorce suit ex-parte. In the facts and circumstances of this case, where the husband is being sufficiently harassed on account of laches and negligence, willful or otherwise on the part of the petitioner, this Court would award a symbolic cost of Rs. 1,000/- to be paid by the petitioner to the husband 4 Surendra/ opposite party within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of this order. With the aforementioned observations and directions this revision application is allowed. ( Mihir Kumar Jha )