DOLLY RAGHAV vs UDAY SINGH

Judgment text excerpt

$~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 17.04.2026 + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 312/2024 & CM APPL. 56056/2024 DOLLY RAGHAV .....Appellant Through: Ms. Samridhi Dohbal, Adv. versus UDAY SINGH .....Respondent Through: Appearance not given. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK CHAUDHARY HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is directed against the order dated 03.09.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, South West District, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi in HMA No. 3668/2023 titled Uday Singh v. Dolly Raghav, whereby the learned Family Court declined to take on record the written statement filed by the appellant and, consequently, struck off her defence on the ground that the same had been filed beyond the prescribed period. 2. The relevant facts, in brief, are that the marriage between the parties was solemnised according to Hindu rites and customs on 25.02.2006 and disputes thereafter arose between them, resulting in them living separately. The respondent/husband instituted a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter Signature Not Verified Signed By:BABINDER MAT.APP.(F.C.) 312/2024 Page 1 of 9 SINGH NEGI Signing Date:24.04.2026 10:32:19 ‘HMA’) before the learned Family Court. 3. In those proceedings, as per the report of the process server, summons was served upon the appellant/wife on 29.03.2024. Thereafter, on 04.05.2024, the learned Family Court directed filing of the written statement within a period of four weeks. The appellant ultimately filed her written statement on 02.09.2024. 4. However, by the impugned order dated 03.09.2024, the learned Family Court declined to take the written statement on record and struck off the appellant’