(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI)
1. The present application is filed seeking condonation of delay of 196 days.
2. Rule was issued on 21.02.2012 returnable on 19.03.2012. Rule remained unserved to respondent No.3 - Sangitaben Ajaykumar Sarkar. Therefore, on 29.03.2012, the Court issued fresh notice to unserved respondent No.3 and made it returnable on 17.04.2012. The Court also permitted the applicant to serve the unserved respondent by Registered Post A.D. - Speed Post. Even today, the remark column shows that respondent No.3 has remained unserved.
3. Learned Advocate Mr.N.K.Majmudar for the applicant states that respondent No.3 is the wife of respondent No.2. Learned Advocate Mr.Prabhav Mehta appears for respondent No.2 and learned Advocate for the applicant has learnt from learned Advocate for respondent No.2 that respondent No.3 has deserted respondent No.2.
3.1 Learned Advocate for the applicant further states that now that respondent No.2 has given address of respondent No.3 to the applicant, learned Advocate for the applicant prays for fresh process of Rule on respondent No.3 on the fresh address which the learned Advocate will supply to the Registry today.
Request is granted.
4. Registry is directed to issue fresh process of RULE qua respondent No.3 returnable on 02.07.2012.
It will be open for the learned Advocate for the applicant to effect service process of Rule by Registered Post A.D., in addition to regular mode of service at the cost of the applicant.
(Ravi R.Tripathi, J.) (Paresh Upadhyay, J.) *Shitole Top