THASSAN BEGUM Vs. ROSHAN ARA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Hon'ble Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(2.) This Second Appeal has been preferred challenging the validity and correctness of the judgment and decree dated 11.12.2009 passed by the First Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kannauj in Civil Appeal No. 47 of 2004, Thassan Begum and others v. Roshan Ara, confirming the judgment and decree dated 29.11.2004 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kannuaj in Original Suit No. 34/70/2000, Roshan Ara v. Thassan Begum and others.

(3.) The plaintiffs appellants have sought relief of setting aside of the judgment and decree passed by by the Courts below in Civil Appeal No. 47 of 2004 as well as in Original Suit No. 34/70/2000 and that the suit of the plaintiffs appellant be allowed with costs. The judgments and decrees of the Courts below are challenged on the ground that the Courts below have erred in law in passing the judgment and decree without considering the material on record and that the suit as well as the appeal have been decided without proper framing of the issues. It is submitted that the Courts below have committed an error in law in disbelieving the divorce on 12.10.1999 said to have been given by the husband. It is also stated that the findings recorded by the Courts below are perverse and based on no evidence as well as are against the evidence on record, hence such findings based on surmises and conjectures are liable to be set aside. It is lastly urged that in Muslim Law it is not necessary that the divorce is given in writing, it can be oral and is completed when the husband of a Muslim lady gives Talaq repeatedly saying three times in continuance.