Sunil Vs. Sakshi @ Shweta & Anr.
|
Head Note
The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13 (1)
Divorce - Ex parte Decree - Challenge as to - The only question framed by the High Court is "Whether the impugned judgment and decree call for our interference?" - No question as to whether the appellant-husband played fraud on the Family Court and obtained the decree of dissolution of marriage or whether the appellant-husband committed any offence punishable under the provisions of Indian Penal Code was framed by the High Court - Main allegation fraud on the Family Court and obtained the decree of dissolution of marriage - She submitted that she had not engaged any counsel in the case and that blank Vakalatnama was taken at the time of settlement for their mutual divorce and that she never appeared before the Family Court - The High Court failed to notice that this is a case in which there is a disputed question of fact which cannot be decided without framing a proper issue and in absence of evidence on record - Merely, because of the fact that print out of the case papers of both the parties have been taken from one and the same computer software it cannot be presumed that blank Vakalatnama signed by the 1st respondent-wife was misused by the appellant-husband or he played fraud and used the same to engage some other senior counsel - Such finding of the High Court is not based on evidence but on mere presumption and conjecture - Impugned judgment passed by the Division Bench of the High Court setting aside the decree passed by the Family Court, Belgaum by imposing costs of Rs.25,000/-on the appellant-husband and directing the Family Court to lodge a complaint through Sheristedar of the Court with the jurisdictional Police against the appellant-husband for the offences punishable under Sections 193, 417,419, 426, 464,465 and 468 of IPC liable to be set aside.
Topic(s)-Divorce - Ex parte Decree set aside