Vijender Jain, J. (Oral)

( 1 ) AGGRIEVED by the order of the Additional District Judge dismissing the petition of the appellant under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of his marriage against his wife, Smt. Vikita Mittal, the appellant has preferred the present appeal.

( 2 ) BEFORE I deal with the impugned judgment of the Additional District Judge it is relevant to place on record that the marriage was shortlived between the parties. The marriage was solemnished on 12. 10. 1994 at Delhi and thereafter the parties lived together till 5. 6. 1995, i. e. barely for eight months. Ms. Gita Mittal, learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the petition for divorce was filed by the petitioner in spite of numerous notices issued to the respondent, respondent chose to remain absent from the proceedings. However, with the intervention of some friends and relalives, the articles of dowry were returned to the respondent and in token thereof, the respective fathers of the parties signed the document, which is at page 50 of the paper- book. There was a joint bank account at Jamshedpur as the appellant was working at Jamshedpur in the names of both the parties

Click Here to Read the rest of this document