SHUJARAT Vs. MOHAMMAD RAZA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts revealed in this revision are briefly as follows:

(2.) The plaintiff Mohammad Raza, who is the opposite party, brought a suit for restitution of conjugal rights against Smt. Shujarat, his wife. After the suit had proceeded for sometime an application was presented on behalf of the defendant applicant that the dispute in the suit had been adjusted between the parties by a compromise reached between them, and that according to the compromise the defendant had been divorced by the plaintiff. A writing was also produced which, according to the defendant, the plaintiff had executed. It was Ex. A-1 and was in the nature of a deed of divorce. The plaintiff disowned this document and urged that his signatures had been taken on a blank sheet of paper which later appeared to have been dishonestly utilized by the opposite party to forge the above document There was thus very specific and definite denial" by the plaintiff that he ever entered into any agreement divorcing Srimati Shujarat, or that the document which purported to have been made by him was ever executed by him in fact.

(3.) The trial Court went into the question, after taking necessary evidence whether the husband had in fact agreed to divorce the wife and whether the deed of divorce was executed by him. The trial Court found in favour of the plaintiff that he had not entered into any such agreement or adjustment. The Appellate Court also came to the same conclusion.