High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : P.C.JAIN
SURENDRA KUMAR - Appellant
Versus
KIRAN DEVI - Respondent
C. R. P. 56 Of 1996
Decided On : 01/10/1997
Revision Petition - Hindu Marriage Act - The court held that the ex parte decree of divorce in favor of the petitioner could not be set aside due to the petitioner's subsequent valid second marriage, as it was in the interest of justice to dismiss the application for setting aside the decree. The court also emphasized that all proceedings must take cognizance of events and developments subsequent to the institution of the proceedings, provided the rules of fairness to both sides are obeyed.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition for annulment of marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act, claiming that the wife was mentally ill and undergoing treatment for schizophrenia. An ex parte decree of divorce was passed in favor of the petitioner as the wife did not appear in court. The wife then filed an application to set aside the decree.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the ex parte decree could not be set aside due to the petitioner's subsequent valid second marriage, and the application by the wife was not maintainable. The court also directed the wife to file an application for alimony and maintenance under section 25 of the Act.
Issues: Validity of setting aside the ex parte decree, jurisdictional mistake by the learned District Judge, opportunity for the non-petitioner to contest the petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that when a second valid marriage is contacted, it is in the interest of justice to dismiss the application for setting aside the ex parte decree. It also highlighted the importance of taking cognizance of events and developments subsequent to the institution of proceedings, provided fairness to both sides is maintained.
Final Decision: The revision petition was allowed, and the order of the learned District Judge was set aside. Parties were left to bear their own costs.
P. C. JAIN, J.
( 1 ) THE petitioner-husband has filed this revision petition u/s. 115, C. P. C. against the order dated 8-12-1995 passed by Shri Badrilal Meena, Addl. Dist. Judge, Raisingh Nagar in Civil Misc. Case No. 44/ 93 by which the application of the respondent under Order 9, Rule 13, C. P. C. was allowed and the ex parte decree of divorce in favour of the petitioner was set aside.
( 2 ) THE petitioner-husband filed a petition for annulment of marriage u/s. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (for short the Act) against the respondent on 5-9-1992 on the ground of cruelty etc. According to the petitioner, at the time of filing the petition, the wife was mentally ill and was admitted in Govt. Mental Hospital, Jaipur and undergoing treatment for schizophrenia. The service of the notice of the non-petitioner was effected on her mother and since she did not put in appearance on behalf of the non petitioner, an ex parte decree of divorce was passed by the court in favour of the petitioner on 11-8-1992. The non-petitioner then filed an application under Order 9, Rule 13, C. P. C. before the learned Distt. Judge who by the impugned order set aside the decree.
( 3 ) I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the non-petitioner.
( 4 ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner has argued that while resisting the application filed by the non-petitioner under Order 9, Rule 13, C. P. C. , the petitioner categorically stated that he contacted a second marriage four months after passing of the decree by complying Sec. 15 of the Act. On the happening of this development, the learned Distt. Judge was not legally competent to set aside the above decree. The learned Distt. Judge has, therefore, committed illegality or irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction. Learned Counsel has placed reliance on Harjeet Singh v. Smt. Guddi, (1987) 1 Rajasthan LR 520 and Smt. Shimla Devi v. V. Kiran Kumar, (1994) 3 WLC 519 (Raj ).
( 5 ) LEARNED Counsel for the non-petitioner has supported the order of the learned Distt. Judge.
( 6 ) IT has not been disputed before me that after passing of the ex parte decree in favour of the petitioner by the Distt. Judge on 11-8-1992, the petitioner contacted a second marriage after four months. In such a situation, the important question that arises for determination is whether the ex parte decree can be set aside?
( 7 ) THIS question arose in Harjeet Singh v. Guddis case, (1987) 1 Rajasthan LR 520, and it was held by this Court that when second valid marriage is contacted, it is in the interest of justice to dismiss the application for setting aside the ex parte decree for divorce. Again the same question was considered in Smt. Shimla Devi v. V. Kiran Kumars case, (1994) 3 WLC 519, and it was held that by contacting a second marriage, the interest of second wife intervenes. Reference was also made to P. Venkateswarlu v. Motor and General Traders, AIR 1975 SC 1409 for the proposition that all the proceedings of the courts can and must take conscious cognizance of events and developments subsequent to the institution of the proccedings provided the rules of fairness to both the sides are scrupulously obeyed. For the above reasons, it was held that the application moved by the first wife under Order 9, Rule 13 for setting aside the ex parte decree passed against her and in favour of her husband was not maintainable.
( 8 ) IN view of the above position of law, the application by the non-petitioner was not maintainable and the learned Distt. Judge, therefore, committed a patent jurisdictional mistake in allowing the above application.
( 9 ) I may state that it is really unfortunate that the non-petitioner had no opportunity to contest the petition filed by her husband u/s. 13 of the Act. It is made clear that she can move an application u/s. 25 of the Act for alimony and maintenance. If such an application is filed, it is directed that concerned court shall decide the same expeditiously looking to the circumst
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.