V. MANIVANNAN Vs. T.R. METHA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant Civil Revision Petition is filed by the husband / Revision petitioner as against the dismissal order of the Trial Court refusing to implead the paramour of his wife / 1st Respondent herein, in the divorce petition filed by him on the ground of cruelty.

(2.) According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has filed divorce petition against the respondent herein in H.M.O.P.No.65 of 2015 on the file of the learned III Additional Sub-Court, Trichy, on the ground of cruelty under Section 13(i)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956. It is the submission of the learned counsel that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 103.2014. Since the cruelty caused by the respondent herein could not be tolerated by the petitioner, he filed the above divorce petition. In the divorce petition itself the petitioner has clearly averred about the illicit relationship of the respondent with the 2nd respondent herein viz., Murugaperumal. Though the petitioner has averred the relationship of the respondent with the 2nd respondent herein even prior to the marriage, he failed to implead him as party respondent in the divorce petition, since he could not trace out the address of the 2nd respondent herein. Hence, he filed I.A.No.245 of 2018 to implead the aforesaid Murugaperumal as 2nd respondent in the divorce petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the learned Trial Judge without giving an opportunity to the petitioner herein to prove his case erroneously dismissed the impleading application. He has also relied on a decision of this Court reported in in the case of M.Mallika Vs- M.Raju and another, (2005) 2 CTC 28, wherein it was held as follows: