Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 1082 (MP)

Sagir v. Yasmin Ansari

2002-12-11

BHAWANI SINGH, S.L.JAIN

body2002
JUDGMENT Jain, J. (Oral) -- I This appeal arises out of judgment and decree dated 31.10.1001, passed by Presiding Officer, Family Court, Rewa, allowing petition filed by the respondent herein awarding Rs. 30,000/- towards the articles given by her parents and relatives in her marriage, and Rs. 5.,000/towards Mehar (Dowar). The respondent herein filed a civil suit against the appellants in the Court of Civil Judge Class I, Rewa. Appellant No.1 Sagir alias Chhedi is the husband of the respondent and appellant No.2 Mohd. Ayub is her father-in-law. In the pleadings before the trial Court, the respondent contended that she was married to appellant No. 1 Sagir alias Chhedi according to Muslim law on 21st July, 1976 at Rewa. The articles as per schedule A annexed with the petition and wearing apparels were given by her parents and relatives at the time of the marriage. The value of the articles has been stated to be Rs. 57,065/- and value of wearing apparels has been stated to be Rs. 20,000/-. A sum of Rs. 30,000/- was also given to the respondent in cash. For the marriage deferred Mehar of Rs. 5,000/- was settled. After the marriage the respondent lived in her matrimonial home for a period of seven months. Thereafter, the appellants started treating her with cruelty. On the report lodged by the respondent the appellants were prosecuted for an offence punishable under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and the case is still pending. The respondent sought a decree for divorce and for returning the articles and wearing appearels given to her in the marriage. She also claimed Rs. 30,000/which were given to her in cash at the time of her marriage and the amount of Mehar as described above. The appellants combated the claim of the respondent by submitting written statement though they have admitted that the articles as per list annexed with the plaint were given by the relatives of the respondent at the time of her marriage, but they have asserted that the respondent took . these articles with her when she left her matrimonial home. They have denied that a sum of Rs. 30, 000/- was given to the respondent in cash by her parents. these articles with her when she left her matrimonial home. They have denied that a sum of Rs. 30, 000/- was given to the respondent in cash by her parents. Admittedly, during pendency of the suit appellant No.1 divorced the respondent, therefore, on the request of the appellant No. 1 the suit of the respondent with regard to divorce was dismissed in terms of the order dated 20.5.2002. On the constitution of Family Court the suit was transferred from the Court of Civil Judge Class-I, Rewa to the Family, Court. After recording the evidence, the Family Court dismissed the claim of respondent with regard to the cash amount of Rs. 30,000/- and wearing apparels, but decreed the suit with regard to some of the articles of the value of Rs. 30~ 000/- and also 'decreed the claim of Rs. 5,000/- towards' Mehar. Aggrieved by ,this judgment and decree passed by the learned Presiding Officer of the Family Court, the appellants have filed this appeal. We have heard at length Shri P.S. Geherwar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants at the admission stage. Learned counsel for' the appellants contended that though the articles as per Schedule-A annexed with the plaint were given by the relatives of the respondent but these articles were' taken away by the respondent when she left her matrimonial home. The Family Court found that the cost of the articles described in Schedule was Rs. 57,065/-. out of these articles the cost of ornaments, watch and a suitcase was Rs. 25,000/-, about which the Family Court, found that they, were taken away by the respondent with her. Regarding one mat and two bed-sheets also the Family Court held that they must be now thoroughly old and tom out, therefore, decreed the claim of Rs. 30,000/- only on this head. Before the Family Court the respondent examined herself and her father Mohd. Ansari. The appellants did not lead any evidence. In the absence of any evidence from the side of the appellants it cannot be said that all the articles were taken away by the respondent when she left her marital home. Therefore, the finding of the Family Court that the articles worth Rs. 30,000/- were not returned by the appellants cannot be assailed. In the absence of any evidence from the side of appellants they cannot successfully question the findings of the Family Court. Therefore, the finding of the Family Court that the articles worth Rs. 30,000/- were not returned by the appellants cannot be assailed. In the absence of any evidence from the side of appellants they cannot successfully question the findings of the Family Court. Regarding Mehar (Dower) also convincing evidence was given by the respondent. appellants did not give any evidence in rebuttal. Mehar is the integral part of a marriage among Muslims. It is not the case of the appellants that Mehar was paid at the time of marriage.. It is also not their case that the amount of deferred Mehar or any part thereof was ever given to the respondent. It is also not the case of the appellants that at the time of divorce which took place on 1.8.2000, the amount of Mehar was paid. No evidence was given by the appellants before the Family Court. There is no reason to disbelieve the evidence adduced by the respondent. The finding of Family Court that the respondent is entitled to Rs. 5,000/towards Mehar is also unassailable. Normally, the first appeal is not decided at the admission stage, but looking to the special circumstances of the case in hand, in the background that the appellants did not give any evidence before the Family Court and no triable issue could be raised by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, we find that the perusal of record of the trial Court is unnecessary for the disposal of the appeal and we are inclined to dismiss this appeal at the admission stage. We, therefore, dismiss this appeal in limine without notice to other party.