Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 394 (CHH)

Rajesh Kumar Mahobiya v. Alka Mahobiya

2014-11-14

INDER SINGH UBOWEJA, T.P.SHARMA

body2014
ORDER 1. By this appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, the appellant has challenged legality and propriety of the judgment & decree dated 8.2.2010 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Korba, Camp Court Katghora, whereby the suit filed on behalf of the appellant for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce against the respondent, has been dismissed. 2. As per pleadings, marriage between the parties was solemnized on 23.4.1998, they resided for two years, one daughter was born out of the wedlock and thereafter, the respondent committed torture & cruelty and deserted the appellant, On the ground of such torture & cruelty and desertion, suit for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce has been filed by the appellant. By filing reply, the respondent has denied adverse allegations and alleged that the appellant has committed torture & cruelty, therefore, she is residing separately under compulsion. After providing opportunity of hearing, the trial Court has dismissed the suit for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused judgment & decree and record of the Family Court. 4. At the outset, both the parties have filed documents and some of the documents are photocopies of its originals. Both the parties have lead evidence, but the Family Court has not permitted the Advocates to represent the parties before it, in absence of such representation virtually, specific cross-examination has not taken place especially in the light of documents and documents have been formally marked. Contents of documents have not been considered by the Family Court, although the Family Courts are required to adopt its own procedure, but the Family Courts are under obligation to provide complete opportunity to the parties firstly, to resolve the dispute and in case of impossibility to close the chapters. 5. The Family Courts are required to lay down its own procedure with a view to arrive at a settlement in respect of the subject matter of the suit or proceedings or at the truth of the facts alleged by the one party and denied by the other in terms of sub-section (3) of Section 10 of the Family Courts Act, 1984. 6. In the light of ineffective cross-examination and especially in the light of copies of documents, we are of the view that complete opportunity has not been provided to the parties. 7. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. 6. In the light of ineffective cross-examination and especially in the light of copies of documents, we are of the view that complete opportunity has not been provided to the parties. 7. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. Judgment & decree dated 8.2.2010 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Korba, Camp Court Katghora, are hereby set aside. 8. The case is remitted back to the Family Court for providing complete opportunity of adducing evidence, hearing and to decide the case afresh. In case of necessity, parties are permitted to appoint Advocates in case of extreme matrimonial action of divorce. 9. Parties shall remain in attendance before the Family Court on 17.12.2014. Appeal Allowed.