In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SHINDE
Gulabrao Nagorao Ingole Appellant
Versus
Dwarkabai Gulabrao Ingole Respondent
Criminal Application No. 3897 of 2007
Decided on: 15-12-2009
Once the finding is recorded that there was no customary divorce, then the second question would naturally arise that, if the husband has remarried during the subsistence of first marriage, whether the wife is entitled for the maintenance? This question is already answered by the aforesaid discussion and by the pronouncement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Rajathi v. C. Ganesan, 2000 Bom CR (Cri) 227 (SC) : 1999 DGLS (soft) 674 : 1999 DGLS (Cri) soft 999 : AIR 1999 SC 2374 cited (supra ).
In my considered view, the Revisional Court taking into consideration the documents as well as the evidence brought on record and after appreciating rival contentions has rightly allowed the claim of the non-applicant/wife.
1. This application takes exception to the judgment and order dated 13th September, 2007 passed by the Court of Sessions Judge, Wardha in Criminal Revision No.109/2005. It is further prayed by the applicant that the judgment and order dated 11th August, 2005 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First class (2nd Court), Wardha, in Misc. Criminal Application No. 19/2004 should be confirmed.
2. The brief facts of the case are as under:-
The non-applicant herein is the original applicant before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Wardha. She is legally wedded wife of the original non-applicant and their marriage was solemnized before about 40 years back in the year 1961. After the marriage the original applicant started cohabiting with the original non-applicant at his house. From this wedlock, the original applicant and original non-applicant had no issue. Since 40 years there was no dispute between the original applicant and the original non-applicant but since last two years the original non-applicant started to ill-treat the original applicant and beat her. There was a quarrel about one year back and then the original non-applicant drove the original applicant from his house. She started to reside at Jamni in her parents’ house.
3. It is further case of the original applicant/wife that at about three months back, she had been to the house of original non-applicant with intention to cohabit with him, but he did not allow her to stay in a house. Therefore, she again returned to Jamni. She is old aged lady and is unable to do any thing. She has no source of income. Further the original non-applicant during the span of two years did not provide any money for her maintenance. According to the original applicant, he is in Government service and earns handsome salary. The original applicant/wife requires Rs.1,500/- per month towards her maintenance.
4. The original non-applicant/husband filed his reply at Exhibit 10. He has denied that the original applicant is his legally wedded wife and she resided with him for 40 years. There was no ill-treatment by the original non-applicant since last two years and he did not drove her out of the house about one year back. The original non-applicant submitted that the original applicant was married with him on 25/6/1961. Thereafter the original applicant came to his house and resided 2-3 days only. There is no cohabitation for 2-3 days. Then the original applicant went to her parents’ house at Jamni for Aakhadi festival. Since then the original applicant never came to the house of original non-applicant to live married life. Thereafter there was a divorce between them on 14-7-1965 as per the customs prevalent in their society. In view of this divorce, the original applicant has given up her right of maintenance from the original non-applicant. Since the date of divorce the original applicant is residing with her parents. After the divorce, the original non-applicant has performed second marriage with one Durgabai from whom the original non-applicant has begotten five children. In such circumstances, the original applicant is not entitled to get any maintenance.
5. According to the original non-applicant/husband, he is now retired from his services who was working as a Instructor in I.T.I., Nagpur. His two sons are running Tea Canteen. The original non-applicant has also filed proceedings in Industrial Court, which are pending. Due to this pendency, the original non-applicant is not getting any pension from his services. He has no source of income. Therefore, he is not able to give any maintenance to the original applicant. Therefore, the original non-applicant prayed that the application is liable to be rejected.
6. The trial Court has framed as many as five points for its determination and the application filed by the original applicant/wife came to be rejected.
7. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 11-8-2005 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class (2nd
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.