Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bench: JUSTICE A.K. Awasthy
Narendra Kumar Gupta Vs. Mrs. Mamta Gupta On 16 April 2003
Law Point:
Cruelty, Adultery : Wife made scandalous statement against appellant/husband about his illicit relation with his elder brother’s wife : Trial Court wrongly held that allegations made by respondent/wife in her written statement and her deposition on oath cannot be taken into consideration while deciding this petition : Trial Court erred in directing husband to file separate petition for getting required relief on basis of allegations made by wife : Approach of Court contrary to settled principles of law which lay down Court’s power to take into consideration events subsequent to filing of petition.
JUDGEMENT
1. This appeal is filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act challenging the judgment and decree dated 5.11.1995 passed by the IIIrd Additional District Judge, Bhopal in Civil Suit No. 323 of 1999 wherein his petition for dissolution of marriage on the ground of adultery and cruelty was dismissed.
2. The admitted facts of the case are that on 14.5.1982 at Maihar, Distt. Satna marriage in between the appellant and the respondent was solemnised and they have three children from their wedlock.
3. The case of the appellant is that the respondent-wife was in the habit of ill-treating appellant’s mother and his brothers and her behaviour was cruel. That the respondent-wife made the false complaint in the Police against the appellant. That under pressure agreement dated 1.9.1996 was got executed from the appellant-husband regarding payment of Rs. 2,000/- per month as maintenance to the respondent-wife.
4. Respondent-wife has contested the case and it is alleged that allegations against her by the appellant about cruelty and adultery are cooked up and frivolous.
5. Learned Trial Court has recorded the statements of the appellant and his four witnesses and respondent-wife has examined her three witnesses and the learned Trial Court has dismissed the petition holding that appellant has failed to prove the grounds of adultery and cruelty by the respondent/wife.
6. Learned Counsel for the appellant/husband has prayed that the case be remanded to the Trial Court because per se the defamatory, scandalous and false allegations are made by the respondent-wife in her written statement and also in her statement on oath to the effect that the applicant/appellant is having illicit relation with his elder brother’s wife. That the learned Trial Court has illegally refused to entertain the aforesaid allegation as ground of cruelty for the divorce.
7. It is observed in the case of Parihar v. Parihar, AIR 1978 Raj. 140, that irresponsible insinuation and allegations made in the written statement or thereafter should be taken into consideration by the Court as probable ground of cruelty. It is held in case of B. Bhagat v. Mrs. D. Bhagat, II (1993) DMC 568 (SC)=AIR 1994 SC 710, that wife in her reply to the petition makes a false allegation that the streak of insanity ran in the family of her husband, then it was found that it amounts to cruelty and the decree of dissolution of marriage will be passed.
8. From para 15 of the written statement and from the perusal of the statement on oath by respondent wife, it is clear that she has made a scandalous statement against the appellant/husband about his illicit relation with his elder brother’s wife. Learned Trial Court has wrongly held in para 25 of his judgment that the allegations made by the respondent/wife in her written statement and in her deposition on oath cannot be taken into consideration while deciding this petition. The learned Trial Court has erred in directing the appellant/husband to file the separate petition for getting the required relief on the basis of allegations made by the wife in the written statement and in her statement on oath. This approach of the Court is contrary to the settled principle of law which clearly lays down that the Court has power to take into consideration the events subsequent to the filing of the petition.
9. Consequently, the case be decided afresh and the prayer to remand the case for its re-trial by the IIIrd A.D.J., Bhopal is hereby allowed and it is directed that the amendment application filed by the appellant/husband in this regard be taken into consideration by learned Trial Court after its reply by opposite party. The parties are directed to appear on 7.5.2003 before the Trial Court for further proceeding.
Ordered accordingly.
DISCLAIMER: The above judgement is posted for informational purpose ONLY. Printout/ Copy from this website are not admissible citation in the Court of Law. For a court admissible copy contact your advocate.
You may contact me for consultation or advice by visiting Contact Us
Leave A Comment