KAILASH GAMBHIR, J. 1. This common order shall dispose MAT Appeal Nos. 69/2010 and 70/2010 preferred by the appellant challenging the orders of the Courts below.

2. In appeal No. 70/2010 the appellant has challenged the judgment and decree dated 11th March, 2010 passed by the Court of Shri M.K. Nagpal, Additional District Judge (Central) Delhi whereby the divorce petition filed by the petitioner under Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 was dismissed. In appeal No. 69/2010 challenge has been made to the order dated 9th April, 2010 passed by the Additional District Judge, Delhi thereby dismissing the petition of the appellant and her daughter under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

3. The crucial question to be examined by this Court, in both the appeals, is that whether the appellant could successfully prove in the divorce petition her conversion from Islam to Hinduism so as to lawfully marry the respondent according to the Hindu rites and ceremonies. It is not in dispute between the parties that the right of the appellant to claim divorce under Section 13(1) (ia) & (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act would be available to the appellant only when both the parties were Hindu by religion, in any of its forms, at the time of their marriage and they continued to embrace the same religion at the time of the presentation of the petition. It is further not in dispute that the appellant is a Muslim by religion and the respondent is a Hindu Dogra Brahmin.

4. The case set up by the appellant in her divorce petition in nutshell is that the appellant was Muslim by birth and she, as well as the respondent, were working together in Directorate of Financial Planning in Air Ltd. in the capacity of a clerk and officer respectively. It is further alleged that the respondent had expressed his willingness to marry the appellant. According to the appellant both of them got married on 3.12.1988 in Arya Samaj Mandir, Defence Colony, New Delhi according to Hindu rites and customs in the presence of their friends and relatives. It is further alleged that the appellant became pregnant and the respondent suggested her to undergo abortion to which she did not agree. It is further alleged that on 28th March, 1989 on the refusal of the appellant to undergo abortion, the respondent had called police from P.S. Lodhi Road but the said complaint was later on withdrawn by the respondent. It is further alleged that the respondent had married another lady on 24.5.1989 at Jammu. Certain other allegations of cruelty were leveled by the appellant against the respondent, which may not be relevant for deciding the said crucial question.

5. The respondent in his written statement on the other hand refuted all the said allegations leveled by the appellant. The respondent in his written statement averred that the appellant had never renounced her Islam religion and never converted herself to Hindu religion before the alleged marriage. The respondent has also refuted the solemnization of the said marriage with the appellant on 3rd December, 1988 either at Arya Samaj Mandir, Defence Colony, New Delhi or at any other place. He rather stated that his marriage took place with one Smt. Vijay on .24.5.1989. All other allegations of cruelty were denied by the respondent.

6. I have heard appellant, who appeared in person and Mr. M.G. Dhingra, counsel for the respondent.

7. Before the matter was heard, the appellant was advised to take the assistance of a lawyer, but she bluntly refused to do so, on account of her past bad experience with lawyers. She also refused to take any assistance from Delhi Legal Aid and Advice Board, and persisted to argue the said two appeals herself.

8. The appellant was told by the Court to first satisfy as to how and in what manner she claims to have proved conversion of her religion from Islam to Hinduism before marrying the respondent so as to invoke the provisions of The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 under Section 13 (1) (ia)