A division bench of the Bombay High Court comprising Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Sharmila U Deshmukh has observed that the woman, who has filed three cases against her husband, cannot claim that the divorce decree should be set aside on the ground that she was not aware of the legal procedure.
The case pertains to an appeal, which was filed by a woman against the order of the family court that rejected her application to set aside the ex parte divorce decree.
The couple got married in 1986 in Ahmednagar and have three children. It was alleged by the husband that after they moved to Mumbai, there were quarrels between them and the husband filed a divorce petition on the grounds of mental cruelty. He also alleged that his wife had illicit relations with another man and that she used to humiliate him before she left the matrimonial house.
The man also submitted before the family court that his wife used to steal money from him and never took care of their children.
The family court then issued summons to the woman, which was refused by her. The court after noting that a case of divorce was made out, passed a decree of divorce.
The wife then filed a civil application for setting aside the ex parte divorce decree on the ground that she was illiterate, and was not aware of the legal procedure, and upon legal advice, she did not remain present. She claimed that this is a case where the decree of divorce should be set aside and she should be given another chance.
The family court rejected her application on the ground that being illiterate is not sufficient and not believable as she has filed three criminal cases against her husband, and, therefore, was fully aware of the legal procedure.
The family court in its order noted that the wife had filed an application for restitution of conjugal rights, an application of maintenance and a criminal case under Section 498A IPC and is therefore aware of legal procedures.
Further, she was given the opportunity to appear before the court but she chose not to. As a result, the petition was allowed and divorce was granted. The family court further noted that the husband had remarried and no case of fraud was made out by the wife.
The High Court while rejecting the appeal of the wife noted that “the Appellant had knowledge of the legal procedure, having filed three criminal cases. On several dates, after the summons was served since the Appellant did not remain present, and the decree of divorce came to be passed. After waiting for almost six months, the family Court had no option but to proceed further and grant the decree of divorce. We do not find any error in the view taken by the learned Family Court Judge.”
Further, while noting that the wife was only harassing the husband for the demand of money, the High Court said, “The Respondent has remarried. According to the Respondent, who appears in person, the Appellant — wife is now living with the co-respondent in Gujarat and is only harassing the Respondent with demands for money. Considering the totality of the circumstances, we do not find that there is any case made out to set aside the impugned order. The Appeal is, therefore, dismissed.”
Read all the Latest India News here
Comments
0 comment