SUSHILLA MARRY Vs. IZHAK FRADDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Matrimonial Reference under Sec. 17 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 is for confirmation of a decree passed by the Additional District Judge on 22nd April, 1989 dissolving the marriage between the petitioner. Smt. Sushilla Marry, and the respondent. Shri Izhak Fraddy, on the ground of adultery and cruelty of the respondent.

(2.) In the proceedings filed by the petitioner Smt. Sushilla Marry, before the Additional District Judge, for dissolution of her marriage with the petitioner, since all the efforts for effecting service of the notice on the respondent had failed, service was effected on him through publication in the newspaper. Despite the service, the respondent, Shri Izhak Fraddy, did not put in appearance. As the petitioner alleged adultery with different ladies whose names she was not aware the petitioner was allowed to proceed with the proceedings without impleading those ladies as co-adulterers respondents.

(3.) The petitioner was married to the respondent as per Christian rites and ceremonies at St. Donmic Church at Vasant Vihar, New Delhi on 25-4-1984. No child was born out of this wedlock. After the marriage, the petitioner was taken by the respondent to C-992, Netaji Nagar, New Delhi, where, it is stated by the petitioner, she lived with the respondent for 20 days. It is alleged by the petitioner that just after 3 days of the marriage, the respondent came with a lady and there was intercourse between that lady and the respondent in the bedroom of the petitioner. Thereafter during the period of 20 days from the date of the marriage the respondent brought different ladies in the matrimonial home and had intercourse with them. On protest being made by the petitioner, she was beaten, slapped and treated with grave cruelty. The petitioner suffered all sorts of mental and physical tortures. The petitioner was ultimately turned out of the matrimonial home. The petitioner in her evidence before the Additional District Judge stated what is stated in the petition. Since the respondent did not put in appearance, the petitioner testimony stood unrebutted. We have gone through the petition and the testimony of the petitioner supporting the statements made in the petition and proving the act of adultery between the respondent and different ladies who were brought by the respondent in the matrimonial home. We are satisfied that the learned Additional District Judge has rightly passed a decree for divorce dissolving the marriage between the parties on the ground of adultery coupled with cruelty. Hence, in our view the decree should be confirmed and is hereby confirmed. Order accordingly.