SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Guj) 1765

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SONIA GOKANI, HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, JJ.
HEMABEN D/O CHAMPAKLAL DHABUWALA – Appellant
Versus
APURVABHAI ANILBHAI DESAI – Respondent
First Appeal No. 994 of 2015
Decided On : 11-07-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : K.V. SHELAT.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 498(A) – Suit for divorce – Hindu Customs – Judgment and order – Course of abuse and humiliation – Held, Court therefore drew conclusion that matrimonial bond had been ruptured beyond repair because of mental cruelty caused by respondent and hence, Court upheld decision of Additional District Judge which had decreed appellant’s suit for divorce – Although, he has admitted in his cross-examination that he does not have semblance of evidence for alleging wildly against wife, who was respectably earning her livelihood and also looking after only daughter born out of said wedlock – First Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT :

SONIA GOKANI, J.

1. This is an appeal under Section 19 of the Family Court against the judgment and order of the Family Court, Surat in Family Suit No. 239 of 2011.

2. The brief facts are as follows.

3. The marriage between the parties, who are Hindus, was solemnized on 3.7.2003, as per the Hindu Customs and Rights at Surat and a daughter was born out of the said wedlock on 15.4.2004. At the time of preferring this appeal, the daughter, who was 11 years old, resided with her mother.

3.1 Aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Surat of denying the decree of divorce, on the ground of cruelty and desertion, this First Appeal has been preferred.

3.2 It is averred by the appellant that she had been residing for more than seven years from the filing of the divorce petition in the year 2011, separately from the respondent - husband. This is all on account of cruelty and desertion. Their period of living together was only around 3½ months after the marriage. Neither the respondent has put up his case in evidence nor has challenged the appellant’s version on oath, with regard to the cruelty and desertion both and yet the Court has misinterpreted the evidence that has been adduced. The continuous desertion of about 11 years is averred to be sufficient ground for the Court to have considered the grant of decree of divorce.

3.3 It is not being disputed that till the daughter turned major in April 2022, the amount of Rs.2,000/- was being paid towards her maintenance. The appellant has at no point of time sought any amount of maintenance, as she herself is a Professor.

4. This Court issued the notice on 24.6.2015 and on couple of adjournments, while notifying the appeal, the attempts have been made to serve the respondent. It was also taken note by this Court on 19.1.2022 that though served duly, the respondent has chosen not to appear. The order of 19.1.2022 reads as under:

    “In the present appeal, the Court had an occasion to pass following order on 07th December, 2021.

“1. In this First Appeal, the appellant- wife has challenged judgment and order dated 12.1.2015, dismissing the Family Suit No. 239 of 2011 by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Surat, which was suit for decree of divorce under Section 13 (1) (i-a) (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

2. Learned advocate for the appellant stated that the marriage between the appellant and respondent was solemnized on 3.7.2003 and within three months of marriage, the appellant was deserted. A daughter was born on 15.4.2004. Presently the appellant and daughter have been staying separately since last eighteen years.

3. Status of this appeal shows that the respondent is served by Registered Post A.D. While nobody appears, the record of the appeal witnesses the communication dated 29.7.2021 by the respondent.

4. We deem it fit to issue fresh Notice, returnable on 22.12.2021 to the respondent expecting him to remain present either personally or through advocate to facilitate proceedings of the Court.

5. Notice shall be issued at the address which figures in the letter of the respondent aforementioned to be: B-05, Vaibhav Society, Palanpur patiya, Rander road, Surat-09.

6. Direct service is permitted.

7. This order shall be forwarded to the respondent to the mode of e-mail at which is mentioned by the respondent in his said letter.”

2. After the above order, the appeal was posted on 22nd December, 2021, on which date learned advocate for the appellant had tendered copy of notice of service evidencing service of the First Appeal and the intimation about the next date on the respondent. The respondent-husband has not been appearing.

3. In the totality of circumstances, having regard to the subject matter involved in the appeal and in order to give an additional and final opportunity to the respondent to appear before the Court and put forth his case, we deem it fit to direct the Registry to issue notice to the respondent herein.

4. Notice in addition to the u

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top