The main legal point established is that the specific provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, prevail over general provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, and counter-claims in divorce proceedings are governed by the Act's provisions.

( 1 ) MARRIAGE has a different concept in Hindu religion and philosophy. It is a sacrament and not a contract. Two souls unite into one and a complete whole is created. The union of two hearts makes marriage a success. A successful marriage is built upon the infrastructure of mutual trust, respect, love, sacrifice and service. Once this infrastructure is shaken or dwindled the equillibrium is disturbed and the relationship between spouses results into one of misery and gives rise to inferior endowments of nature. The private secrets become public and abuses are hurled in law courts. Tie and the bond become weaker day by day and the protagonists behave as characters of a drama full of emotions which are some times uncontrollable. The case at hand depicts a picture of perverse anger and an attempt to slap the other at the most delicate spot. The couple have converted the Court room to a stage and conceived of dialogues according to their insensitive feelings. The scene is quite unpleasant.

( 2 ) TO begin the narration of the case which involves an interesting point of law, apart from facts, is as follows :the non-applicant/wife filed an application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) seeking divorce on the ground that the applicant-husband is impotent and could not have sexual intercourse with the non-applicant and this amounted to cruelty after marriage. On this ground a decree for divorce was sought for. Various instances were narrated expositing the sexual incapacity of the applicant-husband herein. The revisionist filed his written statement before the learned trial Judge and therein made a counter claim for grant of damages to the tune of Rs. 10 lacs for defaming him and causing mental harassment and cruelty.

( 3 ) THE plea with regard to counter claim was resisted by the wife/non-applicant on the ground that the same was not maintainable in a proceeding instituted under the Act. The learned Fourth Additional District Judge, Jabalpur before whom the matter was pending came to hold that the counter. Claim as putforth by the husband was not covered within the ambit and sweep of Order 8 Rule 6-A of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short 'the Code') but was covered under Section 23-A of the Act. Being of his opinion he rejected the counter-claim. The said order is the cause of grievance of the applicant-husband.

( 4 ) I have heard Mr. A. K. Jain, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Girish Shrivastava, learned counsel for the non-applicant. Mr. Jain has contended that a defendant can claim any right by way of counter-claim in respect of any cause of action that has accrued to him even though it is independent of the cause of action on the basis of which the plaintiff has built up his case. It is his submission that sub-rule (1) of Rule 6-A of the Code is of wide magnitude and would cover the counter-claim of this nature in its spectrum. To buttress his submission he has placed reliance on the decisions rendered in the cases of Gurbachan Singh v. Bhag Singh AIR 1996 SC 1087 and Jag Mohan Chawla v. Dera Radha Swami Satsang AIR 1996 SC 2222. Combating the aforesaid submission Mr. Girish Shrivastava, learned counsel for the non-applicant has contended that the Act is a special Statute and there is special provision under Section 23-A of the Act dealing with counter-claim and, therefore, the counter claim would not be governed by the principles enshrined under Order 8 Rule 6-A of the Code. It is also his submission that the wife/ non-applicant had taken a statutory ground seeking divorce and if a counter claim for damages is entertained that will be totally beyond the scope of application and rightly the learned trial Judge has negatived the plea of the husband with regard to the counter-claim.

( 5 ) TO appreciate the rival submissions raised at the Bar, it is apposite to refer to Section 13 (1) of the Act. It reads as under:"13. Divorce : (1) Any marriage solemni