The High Court allowed the appeal against the Family Court's order dismissing a divorce petition. Finding the lower court too restrictive in appreciating evidence, the High Court set aside the impugned judgment and granted a decree of divorce.
Impugned judgment set aside; application under Section 13(1) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 allowed; decree of divorce granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
MATA No.1 of 2020
This matter is taken up by Hybrid mode.
Heard Ms. Tapaswini Sinha, learned counsel for the sole Appellant-Anita Mangaraj and Mr. Satyabrata Mohanty, learned counsel for the sole Respondent-Amit Kumar Dey.
This appeal has been filed by the sole Appellant assailing the exparte judgment and order dated 23.11.2019 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack in Civil Proceeding No.698 of 2015 thereby dismissing the application filed by the Appellant/ Petitioner under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking dissolution of her marriage by a decree of divorce.
The Appellant/ Petitioner, inter alia , averred in her application filed under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 that she married to the Respondent/Opposite Party on 28.01.2007 according to Hindu Rites and Customs at Cuttack. After marriage, both of them lived at Cuttack and out of their wedlock, one girl child was born. At the time of marriage, dowry articles were given to the Respondent/ Opposite Party. They lived happily for two years. However, the Respondent/ Opposite Party left his job in Sahara Group of Companies and joined in another Company. Disturbance started between them, when the Respondent/ Opposite Party changed his Company very frequently. The Respondent/ Opposite Party incurred huge amount of loan and in order to refund the loan amount, he forced the Appellant/ Petitioner to bring further money from her parents. It is further averred by the Appellant/ Petitioner that the Respondent/ Opposite Party, his sister and other members of his family were misbehaving her and apprehending danger to her life and her daughter’s life, the Appellant/ Petitioner
2
left her in-laws’ house in October, 2013 and since then there is no relationship between the Appellant/ Petitioner and the Respondent/ Opposite Party. The daughter of the Appellant/ Petitioner and the Respondent/ Opposite Party is prosecuting her study in St. Joseph Girls’ High School, Cuttack and the Appellant/ Petitioner herself also working in a private Company.
The Respondent/ Opposite Party did not appear before the leaned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack in spite of sufficiency of service of notice on him. He was set exparte on 20.12.2008. The matter was taken up for hearing by the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack. The Appellant/ Petitioner examined herself as P.W.1.
However, learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack dismissed the application for a decree of divorce filed by the Appellant/ Petitioner on the ground that the Appellant/ Petitioner has made some general statements and failed to prove the exact nature of torture given to her.
Admittedly, the pleadings of the Appellant/ Petitioner were not traversed by the Respondent/ Opposite Party before the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack. In such situation, the court should have been liberal in appreciating the evidence of the Appellant/ Petitioner.
In our opinion, learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack should have allowed the application filed by the Appellant/ Petitioner on the materials available on record.
Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Respondent/Opposite Party submits that the Respondent/Opposite Party does not dispute the factum of marriage and their separation.
3
He also submits that the Respondent/Opposite Party is not opposing the application for grant of decree of divorce.
Ms. Sinha, learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant is not interested to claim any maintenance or alimony from the Respondent.
Keeping in view the aforesaid consideration, we are inclined to allow the appeal. Hence, the impugned judgment and order dated 23.11.2019 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack in Civil Proceeding No.698 of 2015 are hereby set aside. The application filed by the Appellant under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is hereby allowed/ decreed. The marriage of the Appellant and the Respondent is hereby dissolved by a decree of divorce.
Keeping in view the facts of the case, there shall be no orders as to costs.
The MATA is disposed of, accordingly.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
….…………………
BJ
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court was justified in setting aside the Family Court's impugned judgment which dismissed the divorce application.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Anita Mangaraj
Amit Kumar Dey
BJ
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
