Harekrushna Behera VS Manasi Jena

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

ARINDAM SINHA, M. S. SAHOO
Harekrushna Behera – Appellant
Versus
Manasi Jena – Respondent

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. Subash Chandra Acharya, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. A.K. Swain, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Arindam Sinha, J.—Mr. Acharya, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant-husband. He submits, his client is aggrieved by judgment dated 13th January, 2023 made by the family Court. His client had filed for divorce on the ground of cruelty. Though impugned judgment was made ex-parte against respondent-wife, divorce was not granted.

2. He demonstrates from impugned judgment, the Court below appreciated that his client’s ground for claiming divorce was cruelty. The Court went on to hold cruelty was established but dismissed the civil proceeding on technicality of non-joinder of party. The Court below had erred in failing to appreciate that his client had not taken the ground of adultery but pleaded the fact to establish cruelty.

3. Mr. Swain, learned advocate appears on behalf of respondent-wife and submits, his client was precluded from filing written statement in the family Court. His client has good contentions in defence against appellant’s claim for dissolution of the marriage.

4. Allegation of appellant-husband was accepted to be true because respondent-wife had not contested at trial, to test appellant-husband’s evidence by cross-examination. The Court cannot be

Click Here to Read the rest of this document