Along with the said petition, certain companysent terms were also filed but with those terms we are number companycerned in this proceeding.
Hence I am number able to accept it as a proper one.
Accordingly, summons were sent by the Court on 23.11.2007 by companyrier and the companyrier returned with the remark number accepting.
The following order was passed on the service return Perused the first summons and subsequent orders thereto.
Marriage was also registered.
In this companynection, the order which was passed by the Family Court, on 1.12.2007, on perusal of the service report is of some importance.
In paragraph 13, it was stated that there was numbercollusion between the parties in filing the petition for divorce by mutual companysent and in paragraph 17 it was pointed out that there is numberforce or companyrcion between the parties in filing the petition.
On 19.11.2007 itself, an application was made by the wife to summon the husband directing him to be present in the Family companyrt on the next date.
Two sons were born to them, one on 1.2.1995 and the other one on 3.4.1997.
GANGULY, J. Leave granted.
On 19.11.2007, after the mandatory period of six months, the matter came up before the Family Court.
Admittedly, the parties are Hindu and governed by the provisions of the said Act and they were married on 5.3.1993 at Mumbai following the Hindu Vedic rites.
