( 1 ) THIS Civil Revision is directed against the order dated 15. 5. 2000 passed by the learned Additional district Judge, Delhi thereby dismissing an application under Order 6 Rule 16 filed by the wife smt. Rekha Singal praying for a direction on the husband to strike out and delete certain allegations contained in the divorce petition, as the allegations are stated to be scandalous, frivolous, vexatious and likely to prejudice and embarrass the wife and delay the fair trial of the divorce petition.

( 2 ) THE petitioner herein Ms. Rekha Singal is facing a divorce petition filed by the respondent-husband Mr. Lavleen Singal seeking dissolution of the marriage between the parties on the ground of cruelty. Before filing her written statement to the divorce petition, the petitioner-wife filed an application under the provisions of Order 6 rule 16 Code of Civil Procedure with the averments that although the dissolution of marriage was not sought on the ground of adultery or on the ground that the wife having had sexual intercourse with persons other than the spouse, after solemnisation of the marriage, yet the husband has made several false, scandalous allegations against the character of the wife without impleading the persons which according to him had illicit relations with his wife. The said allegations are contained in paras 4. 6, 4. 16, 4. 18, 4. 23 and 4. 23 of the petition for divorce and the offending portions of the paragraphs containing the said allegations were detailed with in the said application. The application was opposed by the husband and it was stated that the allegations are relevant for deciding the real controversy between the parties and that he intends to prove the same. On a consideration of the matter, the learned trial Court dismissed the application primarily for the reason that allegations made by the petitioner in the petition were necessary for the purpose of explaining his case and cannot be said to be of scandalous nature or liable to be deleted. It was, however, observed that the petitioner-wife would be at liberty to take whatever objections she may have in her written statement.

( 3 ) I have heard Shri J. K. Seth, senior advocate on behalf of the petitioner-wife and Shri h. L. Tikku, advocate representing the respondent-husband and have given my thoughtful consideration to their respective submissions. In support of his contention that some of the allegations made in paragraph 4. 5, 4. 6, 4. 11, 4. 16, 4. 18 and 4. 23 of the divorce petition are insinuating, false, scandalous, vexatious and irrelevant and are liable to be deleted from the divorce petition as the husband is not seeking the dissolution of marriage on the ground of adultery, the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Manjit K. Singh vs. Kanwarjit Singh 58 (1995) DLT 208. In the said cited case, the husband had filed a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce on the grounds of adultery, cruelty and disertion. However, as the case progressed, the husband gave up the ground of adultery for seeking dissolution of marriage still the husband, wanted to rely upon and adduce evidence qua the allegations of adultery in support of the ground of cruelty on the premises that the adulterous acts alleged in the petition amounted to cruelty. By means of an application the wife sought deletion of certain portions from the petition on the ground that the allegations were scandalous, frivolous, vexatious and unnecessary. The application was, however, dismissed by the learned trial court. The Division bench of this Court, on a consideration of the matter reiterated the legal position that the Court has ample power to order striking out of pleadings which may be unnecessary, which may tend to prejudice, embarrass or delay the fair trial of the suit and further held that after the husband had given up the ground or in that behalf the allegations of