1. Mr. Mohapatra, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant-husband. He submits, there is noting of communications made by postal authorities under flags ‘C’ and ‘D’. This is with reference to our order dated 2nd January, 2024, from which paragraph 2 is reproduced below.
“2. We have ascertained that address given in the postal article of respondent-wife is the same as appearing in impugned order. Mr. Mohapatra submits, respondent-wife has also applied for maintenance giving her address as appearing in impugned order. He hands up address statement of petitioners signed on 30th May, 2023 by learned advocate engaged by, inter alia, respondent-wife.”
2. By communication dated 12th January, 2024 (flag ‘C’) Senior Post Master, Cuttack GPO had communicated our said order dated 12th January, 2024 to Superintendent of Post Offices, Dhenkanal Division for compliance. Subsequently, by communication dated 29th January, 2024 (flag ‘D’) said Senior Post Master informed the First Appeal Section as, inter alia, reproduced below.
“As per the report of the Superintendent, Dhenkanal Post Division it is revealed that while attempting delivery of the aforesaid notice to the concerned addressees, no such persons are available at the specified address and it has been confirmed by Sri Basanta Behera (C/O of the addressees). The fact has been also enquired into through other locals and also through Anganwadi Centre with the same result.
Accordingly, two closed covers containing service notice (43 sheets each) addressed to the above persons could not be delivered and are returned herewith for further disposal at your end.”
3. In our view, above situation must be accepted to be good service on respondent-wife.
4. Mr. Mohapatra submits, the family Court at Dhenkanal has territorial jurisdiction over Parjang, where the marriage was solemnized. He relies on particulars regarding judgeship of Dhenkanal to so submit.
5. Perused the particulars. On query from Court Mr. Mohapatra submits, he had obtained it from website of this Court. Also perused reason given in impugned judgment for returning the petition under rule 10 of order VII, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The family Court relied on jurisdiction provision section 19 clause (i) in Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The jurisdiction provision is for presentation of the petition to the District Court. The family Court has jurisdiction under section 7 in Family Court’s Act, 1984. We need to ascertain territorial limits as notified in respect of family Courts.
6. In context of respondent-wife as could not be found at her address, we made query of Mr. Mohapatra regarding she prosecuting the maintenance case. Mr. Mohapatra submits, his client has not appeared in the maintenance proceeding.
7. Adjournment is granted for appellant-husband to produce notification regarding extent of territorial jurisdiction of family Court, Dhenkanal.
8. List on 1st March, 2024.
..…………………………….
