RAJ KUMAR LYALL Vs. MANISHA LYALL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a plaintiff in a proceeding under section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act 1869, which was instituted by the petitioner for seeking dissolution of his marriage which he contends that the same was solemnized with the respondent as back as on 16th October 1996. It is an admitted case of the petitioner that as a consequence of his marriage with the respondent, two children were born in 1998 and 1999 respectively and now they have grown up considerably.

(2.) At the time when the proceedings under section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act was instituted by the petitioner herein by filing the same before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun on 31st July 2007, the prima facie grounds for seeking decree of divorce which have been laid down in the plaint was that though despite she was professing a Christian religion at the time of marriage and having been married as per the Christian rites and rituals, but she thereafter by her conduct and on her own had adopted Islam and she started putting on burka and she used to visit mosques. Apart from it, various other set of allegations were levelled by the petitioner in the application under Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act for the purposes of seeking dissolution of marriage dated 16th October 1996.

(3.) After the institution of the Suit on 31st July 2007, the petitioner has filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17, on 4th October 2010, seeking to incorporate certain amendments by way of clarification in the pleadings which was already raised in the suit and for which the application was preferred by the petitioner on 14th October 2010. Prima facie, the allegations which were being sought to be incorporated by way of an amendment was with regards to the affinity of respondent-wife, with male friends, with regards to her accusation made against the petitioner pertaining to his physical incapacities and an amendment was sought with regards to neglect and desertion and the sadistic attitude of the respondent towards the children and husband and as she has often reflected an indifferent attitude towards the family and she used to, at times act with atrocity against the children by unnecessarily beating them and mentally torturing the plaintiff/petitioner and it was contended by the petitioner in the amendment application that it was all these sadistic attitude of the respondent No. 1 which was sought to be made as part of the pleadings by amending the plaint.