ORDER N.K. Mody, J. Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 23-12-1995 passed in Civil Suit No. 164-A/1994 by IIIrd Additional District Judge, Bhopal whereby a decree of divorce was passed in favour of deceased Beni Prasad, the present appeal has been filed. Short facts of the case are that on 10-5-1983, marriage took place between the appellant and deceased Beni Prasad. The appellant gave birth to a son namely Kapil, who was aged about 12 years at the time of filing of the petition for divorce. In the year 1994, prior to the filing of the divorce petition, deceased Beni Prasad filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights, which was numbered as Civil Suit No. 9-A/1986 and an ex-parte decree was passed in favour of deceased Beni Prasad. Later on, deceased Beni Prasad filed a suit for divorce alleging that appellant was having a cruel treatment with the deceased. In the year, 1984, when deceased Beni Prasad went to the house of the appellant to take her with him at that time, the members of the family of appellant misbehaved and involved him in a criminal case. In the year 1985, the appellant started to live with deceased Beni Prasad but later on left the house of the deceased with all valuables. It was further alleged by deceased Beni Prasad that in spite of notice dated 21-11-1985, the appellant did not turn up to the house of the deceased, on the contrary involved the deceased in the criminal case u/s 498A of Indian Penal Code, in which deceased Beni Prasad was acquitted. With the aforesaid allegations of cruelty, the divorce petition was filed. The allegations made in the suit were denied by the appellant and it was prayed that the suit be dismissed. Learned trial Court framed the issues, recorded the evidence and passed the decree of divorce against the appellant, which has been challenged in the present appeal. During pendency of the appeal, the appellant moved an application under Order XLI, Rule 27, CPC and filed certified copy of divorce petition dated 22-7-1988, filed by deceased Beni Prasad u/s 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act in the Court of Vth Additional District Judge, Bhopal, which was numbered as Civil Suit No. 21-A/1990 and was dismissed on 3-2-1990 on account of default in appearance on behalf of deceased Beni Prased. Unfortunately during pendency of the appeal, respondent (deceased) Beni Prasad died and an application for bringing the legal representatives on record was filed by the appellant on 19-1-2004, which was allowed and the parents of deceased Beni Prasad were allowed to bring on record. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that no case for cruelty was made out against the appellant. It was alleged that since the decree of restitution of conjugal rights was passed on 30-6-1986, therefore, all the allegations made prior to that date for obtaining a decree of divorce were not at all relevant as impliedly deceased Beni Prasad condoned all the acts of alleged cruelty as he filed the suit for restitution of conjugal rights. Hence, it was prayed that the judgment and decree passed by learned trial Court for divorce be set aside. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that since Beni Prasad, husband of appellant has died during the pendency of appeal, therefore, the appeal becomes infructuous and deserves to be dismissed on that ground only. Facing this, learned counsel for the appellant placed reliance on a decision reported in Vadalasetti Samrajyamma Vs. Vadalasetti Nagamma, , wherein it has been held that by the death of the husband, proceedings would not abate. High Court of Andhra Pradesh while disposing of the appeal of the wife has placed reliance on a decision reported in Maharani Kusumkumari and Another Vs. Smt Kusumkumari Jadeja and Another, , wherein it is held that a petition filed even after the death of the other spouse for declaration of nullity of marriage, is maintainable, relying on the report of the Law Commission relating to amendment of the Act in the year 1976, wherein it was mentioned that there is no general rule that where one of the parties to a divorce suit is dead, the suit abates, so that no further proceedings can be taken in it and that it is unhelpful to refer to abatement at all. One of the situations in which the further proceedings will continue, is the nature of the further proceeding sought to be taken. It is, therefore clear that where the wife has a right to claim succession to the estate of her deceased-husband, she will have a right to continue the proceedings in order to establish her marital status. One of the situations in which the further proceedings will continue, is the nature of the further proceeding sought to be taken. It is, therefore clear that where the wife has a right to claim succession to the estate of her deceased-husband, she will have a right to continue the proceedings in order to establish her marital status. High Court of Andhra Pradesh has further placed reliance on a case reported AIR 1987 Kar 241 , Iravya vs. Shivappa, wherein the Court has observed that as under:- While laying down these principles, the Court must also bear in mind that the Indian community is rather male dominated and the ladies have got only a second role to play in the matters. The ladies might not come to know about the action of the males till they are seriously affected and till they are made known about it. Therefore, taking into consideration the peculiar position prevailing in our country also I am of the view that a wife is entitled to maintain an action known to law for avoiding a decree of dissolution of marriage obtained by the husband ex-parte against her. After taking into consideration, the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that no case for divorce was made out by the deceased/husband in his life time for a decree of divorce on account of cruelty I am further of the view that due to the death of the deceased/husband, the proceeding does not abate because a decree dissolving a marriage involves termination of status of the wife. If the husband dies subsequent to the passing of the decree and the wife seeks to set aside the decree, the question would be whether the wife would be widow of the deceased or a divorcee. If the wife succeeds in having the decree set aside, she will be a widow of the deceased entitled to the benefit of Hindu Succession Act and will be entitled to inheritate the properties of the husband as successor. Such a right cannot be claimed unless the legal representatives of the deceased/husband are impleaded. The judgment dissolving the marriage is a judgment in rem and will not merely involve the present status of the wife, but would involve property rights. Such a right cannot be claimed unless the legal representatives of the deceased/husband are impleaded. The judgment dissolving the marriage is a judgment in rem and will not merely involve the present status of the wife, but would involve property rights. In view of this, the appeal is allowed and the judgment and decree of divorce dated 23-12-1995 passed in Civil Suit No. 164-A/1994 by IIIrd Additional District Judge Bhopal is set aside with no order as to costs. Final Result : Allowed