SADASHIV MALLIKARJUN KHERADKAR Vs. NANDINI SADASHIV KHERADKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN interesting question of law arises in this petition regarding the powers of the Court in ordering the blood examination when there is dispute about the parentage of the child. This writ petition is directed against the Order dated 21-10-1993 below Exhibits 46 and 52 in H. M. Petition No. 119 of 1988. Rule returnable forthwith. By consent of both the Counsel, the petition is taken up for final hearing. I have heard both the Counsel at length.

(2.) FEW facts which are necessary for the disposal of this petition are as follows : the petitioner-husband filed a petition in the trial Court for a decree for divorce against his wife, the first respondent. The alleged paramour of the first respondent is made as respondent No. 2. The main allegation in the petition is that after marriage which took place on 8-3-1983, the petitioner and the first respondent were residing at Kolhapur. It is stated that the wife deserted the petitioner and left the matrimonial home and went away to her parents house on 27-5-1983. There is no co-habitation between the petitioner and the first respondent after 27-5-1983. It is further alleged in the petition that even from February 1983 till 27-5-1983, there was no sexual intercourse between the husband and wife since the wife was suffering from stomach ache and problem of menstruation. Then it is alleged that a child was born to the first respondent on 3-1-1984, though as per manipulated record, the said child is shown to have been born on 30-12-1983. The child is named as Sunil. According to the petitioner, he is not the father of the child. His allegation is that the first respondent has given birth to this child through illicit relationship with somebody and most likely, the second respondent. Hence the petition is filed for divorce on the ground of adultery on the part of the first respondent.

(3.) THE first respondent resisted the suit by filing written statement. The allegation of adultery is denied. The allegation that the child is born through somebody is also denied.