LAWS(BOM)-2023-9-267

X Vs. Y

Decided On September 08, 2023
X Appellant
V/S
Y Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Considering the controversy involved, names of the parties should be masked while uploading the order.

(2.) This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order dtd. 1/8/2022 passed by Family Court No.3, Pune rejecting application filed below Exhibit 127.

(3.) The petitioner/original respondent No.2 filed application below Exhibit 127 seeking deletion of her name from the divorce petition filed by the original petitioner (wife). According to the petitioner, she being a lady does not fall within the definition of "adultery". There is no material on record to show that she had ever committed adultery. Moreover, from the material on record it appears that there are other persons against whom adultery is alleged but they are not made parties. During the course of submissions, it is submitted that prayer for payment of compensation in the divorce petition, i.e. prayer 111(o) is not maintainable against the petitioner. In support of her submission, she placed reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Joseph Shine v. Union of India reported in (2019) 3 SCC 39.